It is a great story. God’s Kingdom is expanding at an extraordinary rate. The church is loving God and neighbor and is growing like crazy.
But, Herod, the king, was doing what he could to please the Jews, rather than God. He had James killed and had Peter arrested and put in jail. Then the unusual happened.
Now when Herod was about to bring him out, on that very night, Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains, and sentries before the door were guarding the prison. And behold, an angel of the Lord stood next to him, and a light shone in the cell. He struck Peter on the side and woke him, saying, “Get up quickly.” And the chains fell off his hands. And the angel said to him, “Dress yourself and put on your sandals.” And he did so. And he said to him, “Wrap your cloak around you and follow me.” And he went out and followed him.
Acts 12:6-9 (ESV)
Wow.
Miraculously set free by Christ.
But then, we see how toxic leadership creates havoc for others besides their targets.
Now when day came, there was no little disturbance among the soldiers over what had become of Peter. And after Herod searched for him and did not find him, he examined the sentries and ordered that they should be put to death. Then [Peter] went down from Judea to Caesarea and spent time there.
Acts 12:18-19 (ESV)
Absolute Authority and Control
What strikes me about this story is not the miraculous intervention of the Lord on Peter’s and the church’s behalf—which is incredible—but the almost unnoticeable story of Herod’s employees—the guards of the jail.
When Peter was supernaturally saved from Herod’s prison, Herod held the guards accountable. Of course, this was normal practice for the day. The king would have to show that if the prison guards didn’t do their job there was the worst possible punishment coming—death. Surely, other guards would take notice and toe the line.
But, in this case it points to the wickedness of the leader rather than any sense of justice—even in Herod’s screwy world.
Herod needed to establish his absolute authority and control. The guards must die for their failure to keep Peter in prison, though Peter was unchained at no fault of their own.
Evil men impact the lives of others . . . even those who are not necessarily the intended targets of their evil.
The guards died for Herod’s sins.
In time, Herod gets his just due for his toxicity. [A few verses later Luke explains that Herod died a horrible death that is linked to God’s judgment]. But for now, it is those who were simply going about their job, doing what they could to provide for their families, whose lives are ended.
Toxic Spillage
If you work for a Christian organization (or other) that is ruled by a toxic leader, be aware. It will spill out and over you. It is one thing to work for a rotten leader who just doesn’t know how to lead well. We may even say his heart is in the right place. He just doesn’t make good decisions. And those failures impact those they rule.
But if you are working for a Ravi Zacharius, Jerry Falwell Jr., James McDonald, or Mark Driscoll the toxic spillage will drown you. What they do to John is likely in time to happen to you.
Just do a Google search on all the damage done to employees of these toxic leaders.
Chuck DeGroat notes, “They all bear trauma in their bodies and brains. Sleeplessness. Paranoia. Shame. Rage. Indecision. Depression. Anxiety. Suicidal thoughts.”1 This is the testimony of the traumatized over and over.
It isn’t pretty and suffering the “side-effects” of toxic leadership is not worth it.
For years, my family was treated with great kindness by the toxic leaders of our mission organization. We have often said, “We were the favored ones.” But, in time, we faced their wickedness just like others had.
John worked for a major international mission agency and thought he was good friends with the CEO. However, that didn’t stop the CEO from finally taking John’s office keys and requiring him to be out of his desk in short order for doing nothing other than giving some helpful recommendations.
I can guarantee it will happen to you as well unless you very intentionally become complicit in your leader’s evil.
You will be required to keep your head down. You will have to say “yes sir” to every demand no matter how unbiblical. You will be required to keep your mouth shut when unethical (and maybe illegal) practices come to your attention.
I can promise you, it is not God’s calling for you to grovel under such leaders.
And, do not believe for a moment you will escape their onslaught even if you do take the knee.
Editor’s Note: This is the Third in a three-part series. See Part One and Part Two.
They had started, it seemed, on a road to healing from the destruction of relationships and the eye-opening experience with toxic leadership in the church.
“It is with an incredibly heavy heart that I write this letter to inform you of my decision to step down as an elder, and my wife and my decision to leave Peace Community Church.”
The Williams were moving on finding no way to stay.
When Michael Williams wrote his resignation letter to the other elders at PCC, he was heartbroken by the actions of their pastor towards him and his wife, Kate. [P&S has shared her story]
But his story, though closely entwined with Kate’s, is also a unique story of spiritual abuse.
Michael’s Story
Michael has thought that maybe the verbal attack Kate had suffered under Pastor Ensome may have actually been primarily directed at Michael. As Michael said, “Kate got the brunt of it . . . before Pastor Ensome1 and I had a chance to meet.”
Michael had served as an Elder at their former church and was “confused and frustrated” by the elder meetings at PCC. There was a great deal of focus on Pastor Ensome’s teaching and “harmony,” whereas, the business of the church seemed to be much less talked about. To be discussing the pastor’s teaching and how to create harmony within the church were important topics, but the emphasis just seemed over the top.
Michael had come into the new leadership position ready to learn. He recognized that churches would handle their business differently and he would need to learn the leadership culture of PCC, in contrast to his previous church where he had also served as an elder.
However, leaving important budgetary requests frequently to the very end of the meeting, allowing little discussion, and the Pastor largely steamrolling the decisions seemed unwise to Michael. . . and contrary to the concept of the plurality of eldership considered important in their theological traditional.
One of Those People
So, Michael met with Pastor Ensome to share his suggestions for more efficient and effective meetings (that more time could be spent on important business) and Pastor Ensome seemed amenable, particularily to his suggestion to have an agenda and get it into the hands of the Elders in advance.
The Pastor said he would give his other suggestions some thought.
After several months of meetings and no appreciable change, Michael met with Pastor Ensome once again. But before they even got started, the Pastor asked Michael, “Are you going to bring charges against me?”
In Michael’s denomination, pastors are under the oversight of other pastors and elders. There is a “court system” that handles “charges” brought by members of the denomination. It can at times be very helpful in settling major disputes that are not necessarily matters for the civil courts.
However, Michael had no thought of taking such action to the church courts and was “dumbfounded” by the pastor’s question. Michael told Pastor Ensome,
“I was there to help and I was not making personal accusations . . . the items were primarily organizational in manner and only meant to benefit PCC.”
As they began talking, Michael asked if the church did any staff reviews. He asked to whom Pastor Ensome, for example, was accountable? The pastor clearly got his back up and responded, “Jesus, my wife, and on occasion I speak with a couple pastors.”
In other words, he was not accountable to his fellow elders, only those pastors who he would see infrequently and had little idea of his leadership in the church.
From that point on in their relationship Michael sensed a “defensive” and “cold” manner from Pastor Ensome. Michael said, “I felt I was relegated to ‘one of those’ . . . people who he held in disdain.”
Michael explained that those were “people who disagreed with him were considered less spiritual, or somehow beneath him, as I have learned from others who found themselves in a position of having different opinions than Pastor, including former elders.”
For months the pastor seemed to avoid eye contact with Michael and did not even greet him unless he was in a situation that demanded it.
Common to many toxic organizational structures is either a formal or informal policy of dictatorship. Some organizations, like Michael’s church, have a polity (church structure) that is centered on a plurality of leaders, providing mutual accountability as instructed in Scripture. In addition, the pastor is simply considered “first among equals” in his relationship to the other elders who serve alongside him.
Though the church polity provided for and directed a leadership that is equal in authority, in practice it is apparent that PCC is really a dictatorship as will be seen in Michael’s story.
Building His Legacy
A major property purchase by the church was presented to the elders by Pastor Ensome.
Pastor Ensome sent a draft letter to the elders that he hoped would be approved for him to send to the congregation regarding the purchase. Pastor Ensome was acting as if he was accountable to the other elders.
Michael responded to the letter with some questions and comments. But the pastor’s letter went out to the congregation a week later and it had misleading information without having addressed Michael’s questions.
Michael said, “I was open to the consideration of the purchase, but felt strongly there was a need for discussion, due diligence, and evaluation first for the benefit of the church.”
However, Pastor Ensome wrote in the letter, the “elders believe this is the right course” though Michael had never agreed to it.
“The whole process was one where I had questions and reservations which essentially were prevented from being discussed on a timely basis nor even with a sense of due diligence.”
On Being Shut Down
Michael asked the pastor if the Elders could spend some time in a weekend leadership meeting to discuss the purchase. Ensome told him yes, but that he would have very little time.
Michael waited and waited throughout the meetings over the weekend, finally asking the pastor when he was going to be allowed to discuss the purchase or not. Pastor Ensome grudgingly said maybe later.
It didn’t happen.
Michael was allowed to express his questions and concerns at the next Elder’s meeting. But the ball was already rolling . . . or steamrolling ahead. The purchase was moving forward. There was no encouragement of addressing the questions and concerns by Pastor Ensome, who seemed obviously disturbed by having to allow Michael time to speak. He just wanted to move along.
So, Michael also asked to be present for an inspection of the purchase and was told no by Pastor Ensome. In fact, only those selected by the pastor were allowed to attend the inspection.
As it turned out, there were major problems with the property. The building needed to be torn down and was not feasible for use as the pastor had communicated to the congregation.
The steamroller moved ahead. The purchase was made.
Staying Engaged
Michael was encouraged to continue serving by former elders. But he was learning an unfortunate lesson about PCC’s leadership:
“I found the board to be little more than, a ‘rubber stamp’ for Pastor Ensome as he regularly got whatever he wanted with little pushback or minimal discussion.”
Again, common to these authoritarian organizations or churches, boards are often hand-picked and/or manipulated by the pastor or CEO to become just an “old boys’ network.” Board members who don’t comply, are generally forced off the board one way or another (as was the experience at PCC).
After making the property purchase, Michael was asked to chair a “vision” committee made up of other elders and one other church member. They met with the staff pastor and Pastor Ensome during which “[Pastor Ensome] dominated the conversation at that time and expressed no concerns of the committee.”
The purpose was to develop a ministry plan for the purchase and involved a survey that the Elders and then possibly the congregation were to be given.
Isolating
When the survey was presented to the Elders for their review and input, Pastor Ensome accused Michael of creating an “illegal” committee, going against denominational rules. Michael said the tension among the elders was palpable and Pastor Ensome later sent a letter to the Elders apologizing for his behavior.
There were two elders present who had served on this committee and they said nothing.
It was soon after this, and before Michael could meet with the pastor, that Kate experienced Ensome’s wrath in a meeting of her own [here is her story].
After Kate’s infamous meeting with Pastor Ensome, Michael, Elder John and a staff pastor met with him.
Michael described what happened:
“To begin the meeting Pastor Ensome gave a one-page handout of scriptures beginning with John 14 and other verses including 1 Corinthians 2:14, Acts 1:6 and 14, and Acts 13:2 and 46. He then proceeded with a 20-minute sermon. The message I got was that Pastor Ensome was spiritual like Jesus, while Kate and I were not. He never admitted the cruel words he had spoken or his wide ranging and harmful accusations against Kate, but rather seemed justified in his actions and opinions.”
After the pastor’s “sermon” Michael got a chance to read Kate’s letter out loud to the elders explaining why she had come to Pastor Ensome in the first place for counsel. However, the pastor quickly tried to shut him down by interrupting him as he read his wife’s account. Michael pushed back and told him “firmly not to interrupt” but elder John and the staff pastor present did nothing to stop the bullying – they sat quietly.
The staff pastor has since apologized for his failure. “He said what was needed were men who feared God more than man and sadly, he was not one at that moment.”
In Michael’s experience and many with whom I speak, leaders who abuse their spiritual authority make it difficult for those who serve with or for them to stand against his tide. Whether weilding a sense of spiritual superiority, power over their careers, or simply taking advantage of other’s desire to please the head honcho, standing up can be difficult.
All leaders, who abuse their authority, enjoy the complicityof others who have a say in their employment but do not take the steps to stop toxic leaders.
Michael said,
“We are now aware that while at PCC and after we left, both of us were slandered by Pastor Ensome on numerous occasions, calling into question even the integrity of our faith – not being spiritually minded but worldly in our trust. He tried to control us by how we might share our stories with others before we left, but clearly does not feel the same constraints on his own behavior.”
In a letter to the elders, not including Michael, Pastor Ensome laid further groundwork for his own narrative. That narrative made it evident that to challenge his understanding of God’s plan for PCC was to challenge God. Who can stand against such a standard?
The pastor wrote,
“Were we following a living God who has a plan for his Church, or were we following our own plans, and all the talk of prayer and keeping in step with the spirit was just a pious smokescreen? Michael thought of me as irresponsible when it came to vision; my pushback was that God already had a vision and our mission was to discern and follow it.”
Pastor Ensome’s own pious language is confusing to those uninitiated to spiritual abuse. He made bizarre judgments of the Williams’ hearts – something of which he had accused Kate – and made it clear he was in line with God’s vision.
To go against him was to go against the Lord.
“While Michael and Kate had a passion for purity, and embraced a rigorous moral ethic, I believe the focus of their lives was a personal sense of how things ought to be, not Christ and his kingdom. . . “
The pastor’s “focus” of his life was Christ and his kingdom; the Williams’ was not.
The “Investigation”
Sometime after the Williams left the church, at the urging of the staff pastor and another employee, the elders instigated an investigation of complaints. The elders were encouraged to talk to the Williams but the Williams found it necessary to contact the elders themselves.
There was a former elder who had faced Pastor Ensome’s abuse several years earlier with whom the Williams encouraged the elders to speak. The elders declined and weren’t interested.
There was a “briefing” following the investigation. The congregation was called together and the pastor gave a “confession.” The staff pastor, employee, and Williams were informed of the briefing but were forbidden to speak.
After reading a transcript of the “confession” it takes on the typical type of repentance talk common to abusive leaders. He had been called out for his sin and he found it necessary to show some humility.
However, these confessions normally take on very general ideas – no specific examples of their sin are shared. This was indeed Pastor Ensome’s confession.
Interestingly, he notes a lifelong pattern of abusing (not his term) other leaders, a clear disqualification for eldership. He admits to being confronted by his son . . . and sharing that he humbly received the criticism.
As the Williams noted, “Some members took [it] as an apology and some thought he was talking about sins all of us could relate to because he was vague.”
In addition, Kate explained that she had “an email exchange with one of the elders after and he admitted that the confession was not all it could have been but a starting point.”
True confession and repentance includes specifics. It means truly owning up to the sin and facing the humiliating process of being wrong.
And true repentance means seeking forgiveness and making restitution.
Protecting Others
As Michael finished his letter to the elder board, he urged them to take steps to stop the pastor’s abusive leadership. He wrote that he and Kate came to realize,
“The abuse of power by bullying, control, using the scriptures to condemn, shunning, and slander have been going on for a long time. There are many individuals, particularly those in leadership whose sin was to challenge Ensome in some fashion. We were told that for many years, other elder boards (or the remnants after some elders left) have chosen to defend Ensome, the shepherd, at the cost of the sheep scarred by his attacks.”
Michael and Kate have called upon the elders to take their positions of authority seriously for the protection of God’s people (Ez. 34). They hope that the leaders will hold Pastor Ensome accountable and not be “duped” by his manipulation.
After Michael’s resignation, two elders reached out to Michael. One said he was going out of town but wanted to meet on his return. Michael said he never followed up. The other expressed surprise on reading the letter of resignation and expressed sorrow on hearing about the difficulties (abuses) mentioned.
The details of the attack on Kate had evidently not been shared with all of the elders. Those details were kept quiet by the Elder John and another elder who tried unsuccessfully to address the sinful behavior of the pastor.
The elders have, to date, not sought to meet with Michael and Kate to understand fully what occurred. Apparently, they are content to let them go and protect Pastor Ensome.
Pastor Ensome has never contacted Michael.
Comfort
While Michael thinks of James 1:6 when he thinks of Pastor Ensome, he does not dwell on it. “If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless.”
However, Psalm 9:9 has been a comfort, and Michael has held tenaciously to its words: “The Lord is a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble.”
Indeed, Psalm 9:9 is a banner that flies before many survivors of abusive leadership in the home, church, and workplace. The Lord seems like the only stronghold at times when isolated by the abuse of others and the disbelief of those to whom we turn for help.
NOTES:
1 The names used in this article are fictitious, but the general story is not. Pearls and Swine does not publish names, places, or identifiable information as it is our desire to keep victims of abusive leadership safe and to not distract others while applying the lessons learned.
Since this story was written, Pastor Ensome was investigated by a third party and soon after retired.
Editor’s Note: This is the second in a three-part series.Part three can be found here when it is posted.
It has been two years since the Williams left Peace Community Church.1 They would have remained silent had the abusive leadership not proceeded to crush others the Williams love.
“Michael and I loved being at Peace Community Church. We loved the community, the worship and a place to serve. We were deeply hurt that we felt we could no longer stay. All at once we lost a place to worship, a church community, fellowship with people we loved. And we lost ministries that we felt God had called and gifted us to serve in.”
Just as we see in the Garden of Eden, we tend to blame-shift when confronted for our sin (Gen. 3). Toxic leaders make an art of it.
What the Williams discovered is that abusive leaders will often “change the narrative from his/her verbal abuse to the person’s (that they have attacked) sins and call the attack a conflict.” It is just another form of blame-shifting where the attention is placed on the offended and taken off the offender.
Pastor Ensome wrote one email to the Williams where he described the experience of a member who came to his house and later told others he had “yelled at her.” He complained to the Williams that his wife and daughter were in an adjoining room and they had said Ensome did not “yell” at the woman.
Pastor Ensome has both admitted to and others have described his anger. It does not come out necessarily in a loud voice but in attitude and words. In his email telling of the story he basically admitted to examples of a significant problem for his leadership – anger [see Titus 1:7-8].
But he skillfully wove the narrative to once again make himself a saint and the woman a liar. The confrontation at his house wasn’t about his sin (what she was confronting him for) but rather about the woman’s perception of his response.
In doing so, he made sure it was understood that he was the humble one AND the persecuted one effectively shifting the blame.
It’s All Your Fault
In an email three months later, the Pastor continued the spiritual abuse, misusing scripture to badger and excuse his poor shepherding, shifting the blame to Kate. He said in the email,
“Jesus knows you, and all that you have done for him. Really, that is all that matters. If my words turn out to be false, then your honor in your service to Christ is all the greater. You are the only one who can fail to walk with integrity with Christ. I really have no power to destroy what matters to you and to the Lord Jesus. My words really make little difference, if any.”
Notice the sleight of hand he uses here? While supposably apologizing and entitling the email “encouragement,” Pastor Ensome in essence told Kate that his words don’t mean anything. It is her fault if she does damage to the integrity of her walk with God.
It is her fault.
The blame for her deep hurt is found in Katedoing damage to herself. Not in his words. Pastor Ensome has no culpability for his words.
As Kate said, a pastor’s words carry a lot of weight. “Especially a pastor whom I had respected, admired and trusted. How could my pastor say such hurtful things in such a mean, and cold manner?” This is why Paul and James suggest teachers and leaders should have more accountability [James 3:1, 1 Timothy 3:2, 5:19-20]. A pastor’s words have special authority.
Kate shared,
“He told me that my eyes emanated judgement so, for weeks after that meeting I questioned what I looked like to people when I was talking to them. He stated that John (an elder), who I also respected, had issues with me. But, John emphatically responded that he did not. . . He told me the staff pastor had told him I couldn’t get along with the ladies that I had poured so much of my heart and energy into serving. . .Though the staff pastor told me he never said anything like this to Pastor Ensome.“
And yet, Pastor Ensome suggests that words will never hurt her. The only way his words can hurt her is if she is spiritually weak . . . so, now it is her fault.
Isolating the Target
When Pastor Ensome told Kate the staff pastor and elder John both had difficulties with her, he effectively isolated her.
One of the most common, and effective means of controlling the narrative is by forcing the victim into their own little bubble. . . where there is no help. Or, so it seems.
Kate, for a time, thought she was alone in her struggle with Pastor Ensome. She and Michael had no one to advocate for them. According to the pastor, everyone was against her.
But, fortunately the truth won out as both the staff pastor and other elder (John) made it clear to her that they had nothing against her. In addition, the long-time member shared common stories of abuse with her.
Though we do not want to depend on others (rather than Christ) for our strength, God has made us for community and for bearing of one another’s burdens.
And so, they can no longer keep silent.
No Longer Silent
Kate and Michael have learned that their silence for the past two years is not helping the body of Christ.
Though they have gotten free of Pastor Ensome’s abusive leadership, they are determined to stand by those who are continuing to suffer under his misuse of spiritual authority. Just as others suffered before the Williams showed up on the scene, there are others who continue to face Pastor Ensome’s wrath; including two recent employees.
One has resigned and another has been fired.
“Pastor Ensome’s words took away from me part of my identity and undermined the loving relationships I had with those I served. He damaged my trust in others in positions of authority. . . We have come to realize that it may not be in the best interest of PCC for us to remain silent because keeping silent may actually be hurting the church if Pastor Ensome is allowed to stay in his position of power.“
It is a risk to stand up against someone who has authority. There is real danger. But this is the way of the cross; to risk harm in order to seek truth and healing for others who are not free.3 As a friend of theirs helpfully shared,
“There is no neutrality with this sort of sin. You either confront the abuse, or you enable and embolden it. Silence only serves the abuser. Sin grows in the dark.”
Comfort
When I asked Kate what Scripture has been helpful as they have sought healing, she mentioned Psalm 18:1-3. She explained, “He truly was, in the early days after Pastor Ensome’s attack, my Rock and Refuge.”
She also added that she felt ministered to by Psalm 34. It helped her to remember to “praise Him everyday and remember His faithfulness and goodness.” Kate said, “Verses 17 and 18 in particular were promises to hold on to. Even though this was a painful experience, there was sweetness to it because the Lord’s Presence became such a comfort.”
Like many of the psalmists, survivors of leadership and domestic abuse can know that the Lord hears prayer and He knows what it means to be cruelly abused and mistreated. He has faced it Himself.
But, unlike others who have survived abuse, the Lord is powerful and able to bring vindication from the deep wells of His love for His people.
Part Three of this series (Michael’s Story) can be found here on September 2.
NOTES:
3 Was it not this very thing Jesus did to bring us freedom; to suffer the loss of His life at the hands of the authorities in order to bring freedom to others.
The names used in this article are fictitious, but the story is not. Pearls and Swine does not publish names, places, or identifiable information as it is our desire to keep victims of abusive leadership safe and to not distract from the lessons that can be learned from their story.
Editor’s Note: This is the first in a three-part series.Part two can be found here.
It has been two years since the Williams left Peace Community Church.1 They would have remained silent had the abusive leadership not proceeded to crush others the Williams love.
The Williams had an amiable relationship with Pastor Ensome. He has pastored over 20 years in the same church and is well respected by other pastors in their denomination. Kate Williams described him as “a good preacher.” She said he could be “charming and self-deprecating.”
Kate also noted that he appeals to people’s pride and sympathies. She explained to me,
“Michael and I loved being at Peace Community Church. We loved the community, the worship and a place to serve. We were deeply hurt that we felt we could no longer stay. All at once we lost a place to worship, a church community, fellowship with people we loved. And we lost ministries that we felt God had called and gifted us to serve in.”
Why did they leave and are now telling their story?
Kate’s Story
It began several years ago when, as a member of the church, Kate was asked to help with a ministry at PCC. She spent some time speaking with each of the members individually and developed a committee to meet the needs that were expressed.
After three years of serving in the ministry, Kate was asked to head up another committee, a committee on which she enjoyed serving at a former church. This was where her heart truly was and so jumped at the opportunity. Kate felt free to move out of leadership of the first ministry as it was moving along smoothly.
After about a year, she was involved in reigniting a ministry of PCC. In the initial phase Kate called Pastor Ensome with her exciting news that there was real interest in the ministry. She was also calling to ask if they had the “church’s support to go ahead” with the ministry.
The pastor was affirming, but was “adamant that he did not want [a particular family] involved in leadership.” Kate didn’t ask why, but said, “This put me in an awkward position of having to either find someone else or do it myself. Pastor Ensome encouraged me to lead.”
It seemed that she could do no wrong. Pastor Ensome was appealing to her skills and she was encouraged. She wasn’t really seeking out ministry opportunities but rather being asked to lead ministries.
Then Something Happened
Kate and Michael were hosting an at-risk child and were struggling with feeling alone in their ministry to the child. She sought out a meeting with Pastor Ensome to share those struggles in hopes that he would share some wisdom, having had experience with special needs children. She knew her husband Michael, an elder, had a disagreement with Pastor Ensome the week before at an elders’ meeting but it did not occur to her that their disagreement could impact her meeting with the pastor.
From the very beginning of the meeting he seemed cold and disconnected from her.
She soon discovered why. Pastor Ensome went on the attack, accusing Kate of all sorts of things and defending himself:
He told Kate she was a judgmental person. He said, “Judgement emanates from you. You can see it in your eyes and that is why people move away from you.”
He stated, “You and Michael are so far off of how a church should be run.”
He “confided” in her that a staff pastor had told him Kate left the first ministry she served because she couldn’t get along with the women and that said something about her personality. The staff pastor confirmed later that this was not true.
He told Kate that John, the elder she worked closely with on a committee “had issues” with her. John, when asked the next day, said that no matter what she had been told, she had not offended him in the slightest. And, in fact, he considered her work inspiring.
He said, “I built this church,” and proceeded to name all the things he had done for the church.
Kate began crying and he told her “that my crying was goodbecause now he could see my heart because most of the time I just seem to be running around checking things off a list.“
She was deeply hurt by this barage, which went on for about 20 minutes, and was baffled by the hurtful comments. She felt completely blindsided.
Michael explained, “There was no love, no gentleness, no kindness expressed. Kate says that she has never been spoken to in such a mean-spirited manner in her life.”
In a later email to the elders Pastor Ensome confessed that he had dismissed Kate and Michael and added he had done that with others before. He confessed that it was offensive to the Christ’s church.
It is still unclear why Pastor Ensome went on the attack.
The Dirty Little Secret at CCC
But soon she found she was not alone.
When talking with another volunteer the next day, the woman said,
“I’m surprised that this hasn’t happened to you earlier. You have made a lot of changes here and Pastor Ensome doesn’t like change. I know of several people the Pastor has attacked through the years.”
Later, the woman found Kate and reiterated her comments, noting that her husband had been verbally attacked by the pastor multiple times.
Two days later, Kate talked with a long-time member and the member told her Pastor Ensome’s behavior was Peace Community Church’s “dirty little secret.” She explained that the pastor attacks anyone who he perceives to be threatening his control over the church.
The member shared with Kate, “There are three groups of people related to PCC: the walking wounded, the unawares, and those who had left.”
As light was shown on the darkness of Pastor Ensome’s leadership, more was revealed:
“I was told that ‘he would destroy me’ if I tried to push back and the best thing for us to do was for Michael to resign as an elder and for me to quit the committee and remove ourselves from any activity that involved Pastor Ensome so that he could not further harm us.”
Keep your head down. Remain under the radar. If you want to continue in any form of ministry. I don’t know how many times I have seen this played out by those who are suffering under toxic leadership in the church, organization, or business.
Unfortunately, the one left standing seems to always be the toxic one.
Changing the Narrative
There are numerous signs of toxic leadership. Though each experience has its unique flavor, there are many common factors.
One of the techniques used by toxic leaders is to “change the narrative.”
It didn’t take long for Pastor Ensome to begin changing the narrative. The pastor became self-righteous in his handling of the situation. He needed to bring Kate down to his level by suggesting she was just as culpable for the broken relationship.
“If both of you [Kate and Michael] feel that the offenses are only my fault or the church’s, I’m not sure anything can be done. Most reconciliation instruction used needs to include each party addressing their own sins (Mt. 7:5). When I have tried to reconcile with people who were unable to identify sins on their part it was not successful. I don’t think it wise to seek reconciliation in those situations. I would recommend you read Ken Sande’s work, ‘The Peacemaker.‘”
Later he wrote, “In my letter I was making the point that there is sin on both sides. But if you and Kate don’t think you have sinned, I don’t think we will be able to have a useful conversation about the conflict.” He added, “But in that case, we will need to discuss your roles in leadership at PCC.”
In other words, we are equal in our sin as we all sin. And if you don’t admit that, you will lose your leadership position.
Apparently, he has always occupied the high moral ground. It was those other people that could not admit their sin and he simply could not do anything with that, thus minimizing his own sin.
In addition, several months later in an “apology” letter of sorts, he told Kate and Michael that he did not have any negative thoughts towards Kate before the meeting in which he originally attacked her. However, in a letter to the elders he delineated the reasons why he needed to confront Kate.
He evidently had done some premeditation.
Pastor Ensome also said in a note that he was blindsided.
Who is the Offender?
Toxic leaders easily manipulate Scripture to their benefit.
Pastor Ensome leveled the playing field by pointing out the biblical concept that no one is free from sin. There are frequently sins committed by both parties in a conflict.
Though admitting that all are sinful, Pastor Ensome sidestepped his own culpability by suggesting they read Ken Sande’s book called The Peacemaker. It was a subtle shift from admitting his own sin to Kate’s supposed sin.
Ken Sande founded Peacemaker Ministries to help churches in managing conflicts. It is very helpful unless there is abusive leadership at work. Sande acknowledges this. He notes in his writing there are different ground rules for managing abusive situations.
In normal relationships, it may be helpful to own up to your own sins when confronting an offender, just as Kate did in one of the meetings. It may help the offending party humble himself and own up to his own sin.
But, the onus still falls on the offender and must be kept there in the confrontation (Matt. 18:15).
Pastor Ensome treated Kate horribly when she only came looking for help. It was his anger that built up towards Kate and Michael. It was not Kate’s sin and should not have been treated as such in managing the situation. There can be no backing down from this or the abuser will take advantage and there will be no resolution. . . in fact, generally there is no resolution when dealing with abusive leadership (or abusers in general).
Toxic leaders manipulate scripture so that they don’t have to come clean regarding their own sin.
Intimidating the Witness
Toxic Leaders spiritually intimidate.
After a meeting between Michael, the staff pastor, John (elder), and Pastor Ensome – that did not include Kate as she was “not emotionally strong enough to attend,” – another meeting was arranged with Kate.
There was still hope to salvage the relationship. Though Kate wanted to confront the pastor, she continued to work hard win his favor. She shared with me,
“It was an awkward meeting. . . I was in so much distress in encountering Pastor Ensome for the first time that I don’t clearly remember all that was said. I found it difficult to even speak. I had shared what I was planning to say with long time members and they told me that was the ‘stupidest thing I could do.’ They told us the only way to stay [at PCC] was to submit to the Pastor. So, at that meeting I basically said I was a sinner, I was open to rebuke, and that if I had done something offensive someone should have told me earlier. Pastor Ensome had already devastated me and I could not risk being destroyed by him.”
Pastor Ensome apparently was pleased by her humility and told her he didn’t mean to hurt her. He stated that his issues were with Michael.
He had effectively intimidated both Kate and other members into believing it was necessary to bow to his superior spirituality or suffer the consequences.
Continued
There is more. Kate’s story continues in Part Two (2).Part Two will be posted on Thursday, September 1.
NOTES
1 The names used in this article are fictitious, but the story is not. Pearls and Swine does not publish names, places, or identifiable information as it is our desire to keep victims of abusive leadership safe and to not distract from the lessons that can be learned from their story.
[2]Ken Sande, The Peacemaker: A Biblical Guide to Resolving Personal Conflict, 3rd edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2004), 156.
This article includes topics such as sexual assault, domestic violence, stalking, physical violence, and spiritual abuse. I acknowledge that this content may be difficult. I also encourage you to care for your safety and well-being.
Second in a three-part series on two women who were sexually abused, one of their families, and the church leadership that failed to protect and care for them.
“I felt so dirty and worthless and useless and to be reminded of my worth in Christ is something I still depend on to this day when the doubts creep in.“
You would think that some former druggie, murderer, or adulterer said this. Looking back at his great sin, he turned to Jesus to see that He continues to love him though, like King David, he had failed miserably. But, now, he had turned from his sin in repentance.
But, that wasn’t the case.
Emily was raped.
Her great evil was being sexually molested repeatedly by a neighbor when a child and then being raped repeatedly by her boyfriend both before and during their engagement.
Her church leaders have said these were Emily’s fault.
Her church leadership not only turned a blind eye to her rapist, but told her she was shut out from the kingdom of heaven. Rather than be reminded of her “worth in Christ,” she has been crushed by God’s shepherds.
Like in Mia’s case (see her story) Emily’s church was not some radical fringe, cultish group. Rather, she was raised in a small, but respected denomination that prides itself on doctrinal thoughtfulness and purity.
But her church leadership has acted with anything but thoughtfulness or purity. They have acted with as great an evil as I have seen in these cases of leadership abuse.
Emily’s Story
Emily went through a period of blindness and attended a blind school for a short time when she was 18. She told me, the blindness was diagnosed as due to PTSD from her childhood sexual molestation and has since been resolved.
She said she began dating Jeff out of rebellion there but was “forcibly stopped” by her parents. They “tricked” her into leaving the school leading her to believe they had a family emergency. She explained, “They refused to let me out of the vehicle once they confronted me about my relationship” with Jeff.
Emily soon after attended a Christian singles conference where she met Chip. He was a big man and a member of one of her denominational churches in another city. They met up once again the following summer when they both attended the conference again and began “dating” over email.
Emily had no desire to marry Chip, but she explained to me, “I felt like I was used goods and nobody else would ever want me after that.” She and Chip ended up getting engaged.
But, she discovered him to be controlling and he hurt her repeatedly, physically and sexually, even before they were engaged.
Following one of his rapes she was taken to the Emergency Room where he remained by her bedside every minute. One of the nurses wrote in Emily’s record that she was very concerned about the “psychological circumstances of family at the bedside” along with several other comments about who was with her in the ER room. It can only be assumed that Chip was keeping a close watch on what she would report to the doctors and the nurse had suspicions as to the cause of her injuries.
Emily has pictures of the bruising. She said,
“I did try to report this to the [church leadership] but was rebuked and told to stop slandering my [fiance] in order to balm my own conscience.”
In addition, Chip had made comments that “he had molested both of his sisters as children and hoped that I could produce several daughters during our marriage.”
Emily was frightened and confused.
She reached out to Jeff once again. He offered to put her up in an apartment he had access to while she healed.
Emily stayed up all night, packed up what she could in garbage bags, and left her family’s home without them knowing. She told me,
“I left a 4-page letter on the kitchen table for my parents and Chip. [During] the entire trip to [Jeff’s city] Chip blew up my phone constantly. In the past if I didn’t answer messages and calls immediately he would hound me and others until I responded.“
That evening and well into the night, Emily’s father and other church leaders were texting and messaging her. They were
“begging me to come home for the good of my soul and blasting me for the sins they thought I had committed, including living with a man I wasn’t married to. Never mind that we had separate apartments.”
In time, her father quit contacting her, but her pastor continued messaging unabated. Emily was being “shunned” by her family and “hounded” by her pastor.
“I asked many times to be allowed to show evidence of the sexual abuse and physical abuse – both in the form of deep bruises and scars (that were still visible months later) and electronic proof I had gathered and kept.”
Since her mother was not speaking to her, Emily even offered evidence of the abuse to a lady in her church.
Emily said,
“Pastor Johnson said anything I submitted would be useless and automatically dismissed/denied because of the way I had left made me an ‘unreliable witness.’ I was not even allowed to submit proof since it was simply an attempt for me to excuse my sexual immorality.”
Playing the Harlot
Emily was compared to Jezebel. She was told she had “played the harlot.” She was told she could be “Rahab” (a prostitute) though needed the redemption Rahab got and she didn’t have.
She was called a “whore.”
Emily was told she had “lied to Chip” because she had not told him she was leaving.
“I was told that as a condition of repentance I would need to send Chip an apology letter specifically citing the sexual sins in full, explicit detail that I had led him into and for breaking my ‘vows of betrothal to him.‘”
She sent a letter that she described as full of the “juicy details.” But, Emily also begged to show the church leaders her evidence of abuse.
Her letter wasn’t good enough. She was planning to marry Jeff, who was a Catholic, and that showed she was unrepentant. It was believed that he could not be a Christian and Catholic.
She was then required to tell Jeff she did not believe he was a Christian and he was going to hell.
Emily was excommunicated by the church.
To Open and Shut the Kingdom Gates
“After the excommunication it was as if I no longer existed. Pastor Johnson had told me I was also being excommunicated because Jeff was Catholic and he told me that they, as elders, had the authority to open and shut the gates of heaven. And that they were shut to me.”
It was a Catholic priest who was most helpful in her healing. Emily told me the priest assured her, “Whatever sins I had committed I had been forgiven for by my faith in Jesus’s sacrifice and that it was time to also heal from the spiritual and physical wounds I had.”
The priest offered to have a couple Sisters sit with her.
Amazingly, Emily continued to seek the blessing of her former church. She reached out to them a year later and they told her she needed to show at least 8-12 months of repentance for her membership to be reinstated. Emily said she lived in “absolute terror of making an error.“
As evidence of repentance, Emily was told to remove pictures of her wedding from Facebook that included her new husband with the feet of Jesus in the background.
Emily said, “I was required to stand in front of the congregation while my sins were read aloud in graphic specifics.” However, her parents were unwilling to see her so she was not present when they read her “confession” to the church.
She “started to wear a head covering and only wore long skirts to further exhibit humility and submission since Pastor Johnson said that humility was a sign of repentance.”
Where To Now?
Emily is crying out. She has been so deeply hurt by the church and her family, on top of the trauma caused by sexual abuses she has suffered over the years. She has held it in, trying to go on with her life. But she wants her story to help others.
She has received so little vindication. It took much for her to open up to others about the spiritual abuse she has faced. Those with which she has trusted her spiritual growth and safety have so badly failed in ministering to her in her brokenness.
And Emily wants to see her relationship with her parents redeemed.
Who is going to humble themselves and seek her forgiveness. Who is going to recognize that their theology has gone seriously awry when they consider rape to be the woman’s fault?
Who is going to step aside from their complicity with rape and spiritual abuse and seek her forgiveness on their knees?
Unfortunately, it is not looking hopeful.
Emily needs to have the final word in her story:
“In sharing all of this I in no way excuse my sinful nature or the fact that everyday I am in need of God’s mercy and grace. That being said, I firmly believe the way I was treated was grossly negligent and spiritually abusive. I need safety and support. I needed shepherding and healing. All I found when I most needed love and light was damnation and darkness. I came to them bleeding and broken and they left me more broken still.
Growing up dad and mom taught us God uses broken, fallen vessels for his purpose and glory . . . I can’t help but think this is one of those cases. I found safety with Jeff when literally no one else was safe or could provide that safety for me. And we have a beautiful family and my husband loves the Lord and we are raising our daughters to know their worth in Christ and His love.“
More often than not, leadership abuse survivors struggle with “Accountability Guilt.”
When we were leaving our mission work after nearly eight wonderful years working with our fellow missionaries and our national hosts, we were driven to bring accountability to our toxic leadership.
We knew that they would shift the blame and justify and defend against individual complaints. So, we reached out to approximately fifty missionaries, no longer serving with the mission, requesting that they sign a letter asking the mission board to hear the stories of those who had been wounded by the abusive leadership.
Over forty responded to that call and signed a letter seeking some kind of accountability for the leaders.
From what we have heard, nothing every happened. No interviews. No change in leadership.
Battle Weary
At this point, do you continue to go to battle? Or do you throw up your hands and give it up?
Pastor Jack was hired by a large church in the south to be a church planter in their city.
The trouble began when he interviewed for the position. He and his wife had flown to the city where he spent the first two days in interviews, was given the third to explore the city, and then would preach on Sunday at one of the daughter congregations.
At 6:30 AM on Saturday, the tourist day, Jack and his wife were awoken to his phone ringing. It was Sam, the church’s Executive Pastor. Sam was not ordained to ministry, but acted and was treated like he was a pastor.
Sam asked Jack to meet him in the hotel restaurant for breakfast. Jack was “confused, but jumped in the shower and went down not knowing what to expect.”
After some pleasantries and small talk, Sam “leaned into” Jack and asked, “Do you want this job or not?”
Jack had sought to be humble in his interviews, noting in his answers that ifthey were to hire him. . . ifhe were to come. . . But, now that seemed to be turned on him. Later he would piece things together. The Executive Pastor took on an arrogant posture for which Jack wasn’t prepared. Jack explained that it sounded like Sam was saying,
“Hey, we are the pretty girl at the dance! You’ve been in a small town church planting/pastoring for the past seven years and now you have the opportunity of a lifetime. There are men who would do anything to work at [this church]. Do you want this job or not?”
The Executive and Senior Pastors continued to browbeat Jack following his hiring over silly and inconsequential things. They were critical of his preaching. They were critical that he wasn’t getting enough people in the pews. Jack wasn’t a “skilled master builder.”
Whose Ministry?
On Sunday mornings the various campus pastors got together to pray before heading to their various church campuses. On one of those Sundays, Jack’s wife was not feeling well. They had planned a “new comers'” lunch at their home. They held these lunches in their home over a home cooked meal and in a relaxed fellowship setting.
Jack asked the other pastors to pray for his wife. Sam responded by telling him to take them all out to lunch instead of having them into his home. Jack said,
My gut told me that was a bad idea (taking 14 people to a restaurant in the city would be difficult; plus the point of the new comers lunch was to provide a more relaxed environment for getting to know these folks in our home). So I answered Sam back, ‘If we don’t do it today, I’ll reschedule it for next Sunday.’ I used my own discernment.
The next day, Sam came into Jack’s office, sat down, and said, “Jack, what kind of man are you? The man who says, ‘Yes sir,’ or the man who says, ‘F*%# off,’?”
In retrospect, he believes he should have told Sam to never talk to him that way again and put in his two-week notice. He said,
But. . . What was I supposed to do? I had just bought a house in [the city] 6 months prior. The congregation had just started. My kids were in the schools. I felt like I was in a bad marriage. I was trapped.
Another time, the staff was on a retreat for several days. A member of Jack’s congregation had been diagnosed with leukemia and was pregnant. On the second to last day of the retreat, Jack was informed the family had lost their baby. He decided that he leave the retreat early and minister to the family.
Rather than encourage Jack in his ministry to this hurting family, the pastors took affront. Jack explained,
“Later the next week, I was called into Sam’s office and [the Senior Pastor] and Sam said, ‘Jack, you thought it was pretty important to leave the staff retreat early.’ I was stunned and didn’t know what to say. I was sitting there thinking, ‘Someone’s baby just died and you are chewing me out for leaving the staff retreat a day early?’ Later the next year, the woman with leukemia also died.”
A Better Place
The arrogant, harsh, and authoritarian treatment Jack received under Sam and the Senior Pastor in the end drove him out. He said,
“I do know this. [The church] was a confusing wilderness for me. And in the wilderness, Jesus did an amazing work of grace in my life. I am a better pastor because of my time at [the church]. But not because [it] was a healthy place that taught me how to be a pastor. It was because [the church] was an unhealthy place and taught me how NOT to be a pastor.”
Fortunately, the Lord has given him a much better place for ministry. Jack’s new church has loved him, cared for his family, and encouraged his gifting as a pastor. He is in a new place without bitterness or anger.
The Question Remains
However, the question remains: Does Jack have a moral duty to continue seeking accountability for his pastors?
Jack sent a letter to his denomination’s regional council suggesting there be interviews of others who have been wounded by Sam and his former Pastor. And he would like for these two men to be challenged by the words of those interviewed:
Ideally, I would love to see those two men really listen to my story and the stories of others. And as they listen, I would like them to say nothing. Just listen. And then after some time to reflect on how much they wounded those that were under their authority, how big the debris field of pain and confusion that they left, I would like their hearts to be softened, to be warmed by the grace, the love, the kindness, and the gentleness of Jesus for them. My hope is that when the Lord works His grace in their hearts, they would then respond by repenting for specific sins and asking for my forgiveness, which I have already extended to them in my own heart.
from a letter to the regional council
The regional council responded to his letter, having spoken to the pastor, and asked for Jack to sit down with the pastor and two member of the council to talk about his experience.
The pastor sent an “apology” to Jack. The letter was less than a page long and included a very general apology. At first Jack was encouraged by the words from his former boss. But, as he considered what repentance should look like from abusive authority, he began to question the wisdom of going back into the fray with his pastor.
It is the same ol’ struggle. Are we to continue pursuing the steps of Matthew 18 until there is resolution at the highest levels of church authority?
As I have written many times, our responsibility in following Jesus’ words in Matthew 18 at times end with Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:6. Jack has taken numerous steps – one-on-one and with those of higher authority – to bring accountability. But, if there is “danger” in continuing to confront the pastor, he is free to move on and allow those in higher authority to do their job.
It is indeed the council’s job to bring accountability to the pastor as his ruling authority. The question now becomes,
Will those with the authority to act on the employment of a wicked leader take their responsibilities seriously?
It doesn’t matter if you follow Christ or are an atheist.
Humble leadership works best.
Jim Collins, author of Good to Great, explained that his study of top rated corporations showed humility and an attitude of service by corporate CEOs were important components of the company’s successful productivity. What he called, the “level 5 leader” was “an individual who blends extreme personal humility with intense professional will.”[1]
Collins noted that they are generally very driven and visionary. BUT, they are also humble. That, it seems, is an unusual combination.
Collins was writing to the general business world. . . not Christian leadership. And yet, this kind of leadership is exactly what we find taught in Scripture.
Nebuchadnezzar’s Folly
Recently, I was reading in Daniel and came across this helpful passage for those who want to lead well:
All this came upon King Nebuchadnezzar. At the end of twelve months he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, and the king answered and said, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?” While the words were still in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, “O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you, and you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. And you shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.” Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar.
Daniel 4:28-33
Prior to this event, the king had a dream that was interpreted by Daniel, a servant (though high-ranking) in the king’s house. Daniel did not want to share the interpretation with King Nebuchadnezzar as it was not good news and that could be dangerous for him as a servant.
Daniel warned that the King would be made to be like a beast in the field though at the time he was exceedingly powerful.
Therefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you: break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your prosperity.”
Daniel 4:27 (ESV)
Over the next year, the King apparently refused these prophetic words from Daniel. He began to see his power as his own…having come from his own hands. Maybe he saw his giftedness as a leader and became intoxicated by it. Maybe he saw that whatever he commanded to be done was done by others and became toxic in his entitlement.
So, rather than seeing all that he had as a gift, he stood arrogantly over his minions and proclaimed his power and majesty.
Believe Their Own Press
I saw this kind of transformation of missionaries in African nations where they were shown such deference by the nationals that over time they took for granted they were as great as they thought. They began more and more believing their own press. And they began “lording it over” the nationals just as Jesus warned His disciples not to do [Mark 10:42].
What I want readers to see is that these kinds of [un]humble leaders never end well. That might be hyperbole but, in my own research and experience, it has been consistent. Whether it is their ministry being stripped from them or an early death or catostrophic moral failure. It does not end well for them or their ministry.
It may take time for the arrogance and entitlement of leaders to catch up with them, but it is only a sign that the Lord is very patient and longsuffering.
We have seen multitudes of Christian, business, and political leaders fall in the past few years. Nearly every one can be described as narcissistic, arrogant, abusive, and/or criminal.
What is the solution?
Humility.
At the end of King Nebuchadnezzar’s fall from leadership he said the following:
At the end of the days I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him who lives forever…
Daniel 4:34
The king looked up. He recognized his lowly place despite likely being treated as the king of the world. He saw that the Lord is enthroned above him and rules over him and gave him all that he had.
Humility.
Humble leadership is the best.
[1] James C. Collins, Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap–and Others Don’t, 1st edition (New York: HarperBusiness, 2001), 21.
I have spoken with many victims of leadership abuse. It is common that they have also faced off with other leaders in the organization who supported the leader reported as toxic.
Relationship with, the power, or charm of the leader created followers and like-minded fools. They became complicit with the abuse though maybe having the best intentions.
But their complicity is from the pit of hell and must be understood and stopped.
Like Israel, we often desire a king and are willing to overlook all the warnings of toxic leadership not unlike God’s warnings to Israel at that time (1 Samuel 8:10-18).
King David, in his Psalm 55, describes the abuser. In these hard words he is describing a supposed “friend”:
His speech was smooth as butter, yet war was in his heart; his words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords.
Psalm 55:21 (ESV)
But, the Psalm is interesting because David continually goes between singular and plural pronouns for his oppressor(s). At one moment you believe he is speaking of one individual who is tormenting him and the next an army. But, the Psalm is all wrapped around the very personal enemy. . . who is not an enemy but a “friend.”
David’s experience is not unlike our own under toxic leadership in many cases. A leader generally has authority because he or she is granted it by the will of the organization – whether a board or other stakeholders. There are others complicit in his wickedness.
Those who grant authority to someone who oppresses, demeans, throws things, calls others horrible names, and generally acts like a spoiled child are responsible for allowing it to continue.
And it is from the pit of hell.
It matters not what great things the leader has done. If he oppresses others, he does not have the Lord’s blessing to remain in leadership.
Recently, I spoke with a victim of toxic church leadership. He spoke of a church board that, at the beginning of his experience, was simply misled by the leader. At that time they were responsive to the victim’s pleas for help.
However, in time, he described the board as becoming more and more toxic themselves. It was evident that they were being “handled” by the pastor and buying more and more into the pastor’s foolishness. These board members became heavy-handed like the pastor. They passed on his words as if God’s words. They sought to control the victim for the selfish ends of the leader.
Real Leadership
Jesus warned of toxic leadership.
But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
Matthew 20:25-28 (ESV)
Real leaders lead as servants to their followers. That goes for churches, businesses, non-profit organizations, or political office.
Standing with Evil
Paul explained the character of true church leadership:
For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined.
Titus 1:7-8 (ESV)
Unfortunately, we all tend to be swayed by gifted and charming leaders. “They may not have these qualities Paul describes, but they sure get things done. . . and they are things we want done!“
We are quick to stand up at their side against their victims. We jump to the conclusion that the leader could not possibly be so wicked as to sexually harrass, lead with harshness, demean others, spiritually abuse, or seek his own greedy way.
But make no mistake. In standing and jumping we become complicit with the evil.
Paul, speaking in some of his strongest words against the Corinthians, calls them “arrogant.” He calls out the ones who are complicit by remaining aloof of a member’s sin. How much more should we refuse complicity with an abusive leader!
Arrogance
When we stand with an abusive leader we are arrogant in that we think we know better than the one who has suffered under their threats and violence. We think that in our place of favor with the leader we understand them better than the victim.
When a report of toxic leadership is made, the response should be one of listening and understanding. Otherwise, the hearer will face the consquences of his complicity. He is returning evil for the good of bringing to light the darkness of sin:
If anyone returns evil for good, evil will not depart from his house.
Proverbs 17:13 (ESV)
Woe to those who would fail to interpret the events in a true light:
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Isaiah 5:20 (ESV)
Do the Hard Work: Investigate
Many will cry foul as they hold forth the rare exception of false reports. But false reports can be found out when investigated. Unfortunately, many do not take the time to investigate but immediately disbelieve reports against their beloved leader.
We all need to be humble enough to set aside our biases and easily affected attitudes towards our leaders and hear reports with a desire to know the truth.
For, indeed, it is the truth that will set victims free from oppression.
Let us be found to stand on God’s side. Not complicit with toxic leadership.
How do church leaders deal with members who have not returned since the Covid lockdowns?
I have heard various responses over the past few months. As churches opened up more and more over the past year, there was the hope that the people would return in droves. Rather, as feared by some, many have remained aloof from the church.
A common suggestion is that leaders “remind members of their vows” when they came into membership. After all, members have promised to serve the church and submit to the elders.
But this response strikes me as a bit cold.
In part, because I have watched with great disappointment as the church did all it could to tear itself apart during these two to five horribly polarizing years. Where the church should have raised up to help those who were being devastated by both the pandemic and the economic results of the shutdown, instead it was going to battle with governments (local and federal) and with one another.
The church seemed to become more concerned about its own belly button than for its mission to God’s world. It became all the more “musk ox,” as Dick Keyes describes in “Chameleon Christianity,” than a missional body seeking to bring hope and healing to the lost.
So, as members of Christ’s family have become disheartened by the actions and hurtful words of God’s people, I have stopped short of blaming them for their reticense to come back into worship services. Though I believe Scripture teaches that the church is God’s design and He is ever building it in His ways and according to His desires, I also empathize with these folks.
I believe that we need to listen to these people and seek to understand their difficulties. Then we can determine if we can love one another in better ways in order that they may want to hold to their vows.
We need to remember that a church member’s vows were to the church that Jesus has built under leaders that are following Him. . . not the leaders’ political party or other man-made rules. [Believe it or not, Scripture does not teach on our political party registration]. It seems that when all else fails for leaders to retain power and authority, they require submission to them as their fall-back position.
Look to Jesus
Rather, we should look to Jesus, the Shepherd of our souls, for the kind of leadership He demands of His elders and pastors.
And they came to Capernaum. And when he was in the house he asked them, “What were you discussing on the way?” 34 But they kept silent, for on the way they had argued with one another about who was the greatest. 35 And he sat down and called the twelve. And he said to them, “If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.” 36 And he took a child and put him in the midst of them, and taking him in his arms, he said to them, 37 “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me, receives not me but him who sent me.”
Mark 9:33-37 (ESV)
Jesus used receiving a child as an example for their leadership model.
What does that say to church leaders? At the very least, it suggests humility. Particularly, in the New Testament society, children were the humblest of all. They had NO authority. Who would listen (or receive) a child as important?
Rather than playing the authority trump card (no pun intended), consider asking these questions of those who are struggling to re-engage with the church:
Are there ways the church leaders, or members of the church, have made it difficult for you to return?
Are there ways the church leaders have failed to be Christ-like in their leadership?
Are there ways we have added to Scripture or subtracted such that you do not trust our leadership?
How can we serve you as shepherds?
Don’t Stop
But, you must not stop there.
Many leaders will ask these questions and then show their toxic leadership by then telling members what’s what. The leaders will defend and justify themselves and their congregations rather than humbly respond in empathy (even when the member is wrong). . . hearing the hearts of their sheep and recognizing that they have their reasons for being hurt.
Leaders who desire to be Christ-like in their leadership must humbly consider their own failings and seek to restore through humility those who are wandering in the wilderness.
Nearly every individual I know, who is failing to return to church at this time, has good reasons. Those reasons are because they feel beat up after every service by well-meaning, but Pharisaical leaders. . . leaders who have added to Scripture their own ethical and political standards.
Leaders, turn your eyes upon Jesus and turn away from holding your authority tightly. Seek to be last rather than first. Serve, rather than be served. Defend the sheep rather than self.
Every single week a small group of us from church met together. We alternated weeks being out somewhere, such as trivia night at a brewery, with meeting for dinner in someone’s home. Yes, we might have spiritual discussions and yes, we did frequently share concerns and needs for prayer and, yes, we did often pray together, but the focus was on our relationships. Intentional community, it was called.
This group of people became my lifeline, my family of sorts, my refuge during some terribly hard years. I lived for Tuesday evenings when I knew I could show up and be me in whatever mess I was in. And they knew I was there for them. Always. And outside of Tuesdays we still got together for hiking and game nights and such. Life together. It was the closest thing I had ever experienced up to that point to what I think true fellowship looks like.
A new pastor came along and changed things up. He brought an agenda. Each week became a specific Bible study with questions and answers and asking one another spiritual questions about sin and repentance. The tone changed. The atmosphere changed. The streams of living water dried up and I was faced with a desert of spiritual expectations and forced piety. When we questioned the changes the leader of the group asked, “But don’t you love the Word?” The pastor blasted us in a sermon, proclaiming we were to “say no to casualness of faith…just hanging out and doing things together because it makes us feel good.” He told my husband that the change was not up for discussion. Drop it.
And like that, just like that, what had been so very beautfiful to me was gone. This all happened amid a growing concern over other serious issues and I quit attending church. And then we left the church altogether. Another story for another time.
I was left to grieve and grieve deeply what I had lost. And yet there was a hefty heap of shame on top of it all. Why was the transition from hanging out and loving one another to a structured spiritual time together so hard for me? Did I “love the Word?” Or didn’t I?
I had always longed for a sense of community and felt oh, so bad for wanting it. In church cultures where deep dives into theology or telling “the lost” about Jesus were the true marks of a heart after God, my hunger for connection was seen as avoiding the hard truth that Jesus should be all I need.
Why was the loss of this little community so devastating to me? When reading Krispin Mayfield’s book, Attached to God, I found my answer.
And rather than try to cut and paste bits and pieces, I’m going to share most of the entire section:
Therapist Francis Broucek worked with many clients in families where the mode of relationship was to meet a parent’s strict standard. This created a sense of self that put value in the person’s performance. He found that in the most important relationships, where “a connection should be, there is only the experience of being evaluated or evaluating oneself.” It doesn’t always have to be negative judgment, but that every interaction was based on how the child was peforming, how they were doing, rather than the parent coming close for closeness’ sake. For these clients, the relationship was all assessment, absent of true connection.
For many of us, this mirrors the spiritual tradition we’ve been given. Most facets of religious life have been about determining whether you are following God in the right ways. How close are you? What are you supposed to be doing next? Are you growing–or backsliding? What is God trying to teach you right now?
,,,Broucek found that this same prompting between parents and children created shame. It’s not surprising since in the absense of connection. we begin to conclude that the disconnect is because there is something repulsive about us. The more we continue to focus on our performance and progress, the more we feel shame. When we believe that shame is due to sin, then we try to get it right–or confess our way out of shame. But if we’re going to heal from shame, we need relationships that go beyond evaluation.
As Broucek reflected on our need for a connection that creates sanctuary in a world of evaluation, he thought about the importance of interactions that aren’t rooted in evaluation, assessment, standards, or measuring up. Searching for a word to describe a relationship that is nonevaluative, he decided simply to call this kind of connection “communion.”
Krispin Mayfield, “Attached to God”
Communion. That is what I had. That is what I lost when the template of spiritual performance and evaluation was slammed down on a precious group of people.
Mayfield had started this section of the book by saying that in order to understand our belovedness, we need to experience it. We need to be able to connect with God and with people minus the constant state of evaluation and performance.
Some of my friends and I have a regular conversation that goes something like this: “Why are friendships with church people so much harder and more awkward?” I think this explains so much. We have been somehow convinced that our own connection to God is dependent on our performance and part of our performance is policing the performance of those around us. Thus we admonish and exhort and chide, we goad and sharpen, we lob scripture bombs, and often suffocate with the silence of disapproval. But we don’t listen. We don’t treat one another with respect. We don’t necessarily treat one another as beloved. We don’t believe that connecting for the sake of connecting is beautiful in and of itself.
(True admonishment and exhortation, when necessary, should only come in the context of strong connection and community. Otherwise it does way more damage that good.)
Why was I so grief-stricken? I had lost communion. I had lost communion in the name of God.
I know my processing of this has been long and rambling but it now makes so much sense to me. Reading this short passage in a very excellent book (I highly recommend reading it) proved to be lightbulb moment in my understanding of my hunger for connection, community, communion. It helped me understand my grief and why that loss was so very profound. And it helps me know what I, what we all, really need.
