Category Archives: churchtoo

Making a Difference: Research that is Boots on the Ground in Dracula’s Neighborhood

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

Spending time with researchers on “bad leadership” from around the world this past week was a helpful, eye-opening, and an enjoyable experience.

Anders Örtenblad and Horia Moașa gathered us from nearly 20 countries to discuss and present research findings on bad leadership. The gathering— “The Dracula Conference on Bad Leadership” —was held at the University of Transylvania (yes, there is a real place called that) in Brașov, Romania.

“Dracula” —given that name by Irish novelist Bram Stoker—was actually Vlad the Impaler, a former ruler in the Transylvania region of Romania, a picturesque location in the mountains of Romania.

Count Dracula & Grey Leadership

Vlad was actually a hero to Romanians as a law and order guy who also repelled the Ottoman army from the Romanian homeland. He was also rather ruthless.

This distinction was a model to some researchers who are looking at bad leadership from the subjective eye-of-the-beholder perspective. Some see Vlad as evil (mostly those of us who only know him from Irish novelist Stoker’s vantage point—Dracula the blood-sucking vampire), but others see him as a hero.

Therefore, Dracula (or Vlad) is the perfect model for the “grey” leader (vs. dark) for some researchers.

These researchers see bad leaders as having redeemable qualities.

However, as one well-known researcher who has been at the forefront of bullying in the workplace research for 30 years or more (in Norway), noted to me as we gazed up at Dracula’s castle on an outing, “This is a dangerous perspective.” This perspective can end up giving a free pass to leaders because they do “some good.”

I have watched destructive or toxic leadership consistently end badly.

This runs counter to seeing bad leaders as being both good and bad. Maybe we can see the “good” they have done whether in policies put in place or actions taken, but suggest, “I know he isn’t a good person.” We may be hesitant to classify any leader as truly toxic. We don’t want to stigmatize leaders.

I understand this view and appreciate the optimism.

But truly toxic leadership always ends badly.

This is a type of leadership distinguished by a lack of humility to see and respond to their own failings. Yes, there are “grey” leaders who might be too harsh or somewhere along the line of narcisissm, but they respond to confrontation with thoughtfulness and a willingness to work on their leadership skills. We need the research in this area, because real change can be made.

But “toxic leadership” does not possess this humility and is a different animal. So we need to be able to discern between the two.

Toxic leader’s destruction of relationships, near and far, is too great to ignore. I can (almost) guarantee through empirical evidence, and a large range of research, that leadership that is not humble or responsive to confrontation for mistakes made by them will end in greater destruction than any positive outcomes their compliant followers attribute to them.

Boots on the Ground

This brings me to the “boots on the ground” part of this blog’s title.

It was suggested that we pay attention to the practitioners of toxic leadership—those who are living in the spaces where toxic leadership takes place and are learning from empirical evidence, maybe more so than from written research.

Much of what I have learned about toxic leadership has been in the area of abuse in the home (domestic violence) from engagement with those who have suffered from it.

When I shared with one new friend at the conference that my entry to this field was through a combination of domestic violence and leadership abuse they noted that researcher Bennet Tepper made the same connection nearly 30 years ago. There was pushback at that time, according to this researcher, because Tepper had not made the connection (through research) clear between domestic violence and leadership abuse dynamics. He largely took it for granted supposedly.

In my 10 years of interviews and research, there is no doubt whatsoever that there is a very clear connection between the dynamics and psychology of abuse in the home and workplace. It is for that reason that I nearly always connect the two in my own writing. Much of my early research was specifically in domestic violence as I sought to understand what and why toxic leaders were thinking and acting the way they did.

This connection is not to say that an abuser in the home also abuses in the workplace. That is not the connection I am making. It is that the intent of the leader in the workplace and the abuser in the home is the same: (S)he believes (s)he is entitled to be at the top of the pecking order and controls others in order to maintain that position.

The tactics these abusive individuals use may be different at home and in the workplace, but those tactics have the same goal. Therefore, it is helpful to study domestic violence to understand workplace abuse.

It is Wicked

Getting back to the earlier part of this blog, the abusive partner or leader’s perspective is wicked and evil. It is self-centered, selfish, and oppressive to those under their thumb.

If you spend any time with boots on the ground or have spent any time as the target of an abusive leader, you will at least to some degree understand how truly wicked it is. The stories of illnesses—physical, emotional, and spiritual—created by these leaders should stop anyone from making light of it or suggesting toxic leadership is in any way “grey.”

We must make a distinction between these types of leadership.

Facing a Terrifying Leader: Choosing When to Leave and When to Stay

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

To some this is just old news.

But to a significant number of Christians, the choice of whether to stay under a toxic leader in the home, workplace, or organization is not a question.

These folks might consider leaving, but the go-to is a belief that God has called them to suffer for Christ’s sake. And it is not because they have no good reason to believe this.

The Example of Paul

Early in the church’s history, the Apostle Paul was traveling on his third missionary journey. He was traveling through Macedonia and Greece visiting churches he and others had founded seeking to strengthen them. Paul was on his way to Jerusalem to share in the annual Feast of the Passover. It was an important festival in the life of any Jew with any historical, biblical, or cultural perspective.

However, Paul was headed head-long into a trap you might say.

In Acts 21, the story is narrated by Luke:

On the next day we departed and came to Caesarea, and we entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him. 9 He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied. 10 While we were staying for many days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. 11 And coming to us, he took Paul’s belt and bound his own feet and hands and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘This is how the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’” 12 When we heard this, we and the people there urged him not to go up to Jerusalem. 13 Then Paul answered, “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be imprisoned but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” 14 And since he would not be persuaded, we ceased and said, “Let the will of the Lord be done.”

[Acts 21:7-14 (ESV)]

It is a poignant moment in the early church. It was a warning apparently from the Lord in the form of a prophecy—acted out as was common in that time—and then heartily rejected by Paul.

Notice it is not a rejection of the content—Paul did not suggest it was a “false prophecy” —but rather a rejection of fear based on it.

Paul, in rejecting what those who were present wanted him to do, was readying himself to face some of the most toxic leaders of his time—the Jewish religious leaders. These leaders would seek his death, as the story goes, at the hands of the non-Jews.

Paul told the crowd that he was prepared “even to die” for a very high purpose—the “name of the Lord Jesus.”

Even to Die

Paul’s response has caused no small amount of guilt in the hearts of those who have faced off against toxic people. These feel that they are refusing God’s command to hang in there, even when the going gets tough.

However, I want to lay those fears to rest while not giving anyone too much ease of mind. My reason is simply that Scripture gives us several directions in these cases and Paul chose an honorable one of those directions.

But not the only honorable one.

It might help to show you how Paul responded to a somewhat similar situation:

When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him, 24 but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night in order to kill him, 25 but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket.

Acts 9:23-25

Those who understand that narratives in Scripture do not necessarily provide imperatives to be lived by may suggest that Acts 9:25 is not necessarily “normative” for the church. I would agree, just as I would suggest that Acts 21 is as a narrative not normative as well.

Evasion or Courage?

As such, it is important to note that neither passage suggests Paul was commanded to take the action—evasive in one case and courageous in the other.

There is however, one distinction in that Paul says in Acts 20 he is “constrained by the Spirit” to go while not knowing fully what would be the result. But then again, there is conflict found in the passage in that the disciples are said to be telling him not to go “through the Spirit.”

Who was right?

I believe both were right. Paul believed that, in the persecution from toxic leaders awaiting him in Jerusalem, was an opportunity to be an extraordinary witness to Jesus. Whereas the disciples saw it as an end to his ministry to the churches if he was dead.

And both likely happened. Paul’s ministry was both expansive and cut short by likely martyrdom.

Binding the Conscience

What we need to see is that Scripture does not bind our consciences when it comes to staying or leaving toxic leadership.

There are many considerations in determining what is best for each individual person:

  • By staying in a toxic organization, will I be able to use the gifts God has given me for the expansion of His kingdom through good work for a good end?
  • Will mine or my family’s mental, spiritual, or physical health be affected negatively making it impossible to do that work? Toxic leaders do cause traumatic reactions.
  • Will my staying show agreement with an evil leader? And in turn be a negative witness to others?
  • Will my leaving leave others—fellow employees—lacking the support that is needed in their personal or work lives?
  • Am I giving up too soon? I hesitate to put this in as most hang in too long and are horribly traumatized by it. But there are those who can have an important impact on the organization by staying.

There are other questions that need to be asked. But then it comes down to your own conscience.

But do not let it be bound by an ill-conceived perspective on Paul’s actions in Acts 21.

Insolent Opponents: Can Toxic Leaders Change?

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

Like in domestic abuse research, there is debate as to the malleability of abusive people in leadership.

I would guess that in most people’s experience, there is little hope for such change.

In my own experience and stories that I have heard, there is little expectation for transformation in abusive leadership. In fact, I am presently in the midst of a book research project that focuses on those cases where the leader is fully entrenched in his toxic leadership.

However, in leadership research, there is article after article describing remedies to “bad” leaders. There have indeed been leaders who were toxic and yet were transformed apparently by these various remedies.

Malleability

It leaves us with a question: What does it take for an entitled, self-centered, abusive individual to transform from the ugly duckling into a prince—sorry, those are probably two different stories.

Scripture describes some of these leaders:

Answer not a fool according to his folly,
lest you be like him yourself.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
lest he be wise in his own eyes.
Proverbs 26:4-5 (ESV)

“Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.”
Matthew 7:6 (ESV)

Whoever corrects a scoffer gets himself abuse,
and he who reproves a wicked man incurs injury.
Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you;
reprove a wise man, and he will love you.
Proverbs 9:7-8 (ESV)

Drive out a scoffer, and strife will go out,
and quarreling and abuse will cease.
Proverbs 22:10 (ESV)

These passages present hopeless situations and if you listen to the stories of those who have suffered under toxic leadership—you can find many of those stories on this site—you will hear that hurt and anquish of hopelessness. It is frustrating, infuriating, and crushing to face such deeply entitled and arrogant people.

There really is no hope . . .

but for the grace of God.

God’s Grace

What follows is not a call to just give these leaders a break—live with their injustices—but in fact a recognition that our holding them accountable may be an important part of their change, not just our safety.

The Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy around 65 AD. Timothy was pastoring a church in Ephesus and Paul was his mentor.

Near the beginning of his first letter to Timothy, Paul describes his own background. It is for the purpose of encouraging Timothy that the Lord of heaven and earth is working in people to transform them—even the worst of sinners as Paul describes himself (1 Timothy 1:15).

I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, 13 though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief, 14 and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. 15 The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost.
1 Timothy 1:12-15 (ESV)

Paul was a mean guy. He was driven by a toxic form of religion to destroy rather than to build. He took Phariseeism to a new height of noxiousness. Whereas many Pharisees saw themselves as above everyone else—more knowledgeable, wise, and powerful—Paul took it on the road to destroy those who were lesser . . . specifically those who named the name of Christ.

Insolent Opponent

Paul uses a particular term in this passage that sets him apart from other people— “insolent opponent.”

This term (ὑβριστής) means, an “insulter, maltreater, despiteful, injurious, uplifted with pride, either heaps insulting language upon others or does them some shameful act of wrong” (Strongs Dictionary).

Pretty harsh words. And yet, they are not spoken of someone else. They are Paul’s words for Paul. He was that man.

Clearly, he is a changed man. Of course, he is still sinful and describes that experience in depth in Romans 7. Despite having been an arrogant, driven, noxious individual, he is now humble and recognizes his sinfulness and is driven to follow Christ fully.

How did that come about?

Easter for Paul

Easter came for Paul on the road to Damascus. In Acts 9, Paul comes face to face with the Lord whom he is persecuting.

It is an amazing story both for its miraculous content, but for the beauty of its results.

The Bible says that Paul was blinded by a light from heaved and fell down. He then heard, “Saul, Saul [his name was changed later to Paul], why are you persecuting me?”

Paul, in his incredulity, asked, “Who are you, Lord?” And so the Lord introduced Himself to Paul. The same Paul that spoke a good line about following God—may that in itself be a lesson to us.

Though Paul had his eyes open, he was unable to see anything, so he was led into Damascus and told by the Lord to go to see a certain follower of Jesus.

There is so much more to the story, but the results of this amazing encounter is that Paul, a toxic leader of the first century, was transformed by the Lord.

I am sorry that the statistics do not give a lot of hope for us as we pray and pray that our abusive leader be changed. However, we should always hold out hope that while man cannot be changed, the Lord can change man. The resurrection makes that possible and most who are reading this have likely had that same experience—though maybe not being blinded and spoken to from the clouds.

So, as we face off with our toxic leaders, we call upon the Lord and we seek accountability. The Lord brought accountability to Paul—He knocked Paul on his rear, if I may be so crass. So, the Lord calls us to knock these leaders on their rears that maybe they will face a reckoning with Jesus.

James and Oppression 2: The Center of Toxic Leadership

Posted on by
Reply

From where does oppressive behavior come?

In this second look at the book of James, we will consider the center of toxic leadership. As was noted in part one of this series, much teaching in leadership circles looks at the outward behavior of the leader as the standard.

I have had the pleasure and privilege of writing alongside academic researchers in the field of toxic leadership—not because I am particularly an academic mind you—and have noticed this particular bent. I understand it and am not opposed to what is being written. Just as the US military takes a decidedly behavioral perspective in its training and discipline (as a friend told me), so too I know in the business world it is more feasible to look at the outward actions of leaders. There is the view that as long as you keep your toxins inside, you are golden as a leader.

However, as a Christian writing mostly to those confronted by toxic leadership in Christian organizations—including the church—I am concerned about leaders who may get a free pass because their toxins are covered up—at least for a time.

And that is a very important point; I believe toxic leadership will [nearly] always raise its ugly head at some point if the leader has a heart that is bent that way.

And so, this blog is looking at what James says about the heart. Because it is getting to the beast within that is going to truly and actually impact the toxic leader’s behavior and help in bringing accountability.

James says in 3:13:

Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.

Notice the interesting interplay here. James first points to the heart: “wise and understanding”. Those are heart issues—the inner man. What does he think and feel. Is he “wise and understanding?”

Then he goes on to note that behavior should come from wisdom and understanding. His good conduct will show whether he is wise or not. His behavior will show what is in his heart.

Then James goes on to explain more:

But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth. 15 This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.

When toxic leaders are described, it is usually with terms like arrogance, liar, entitled, controlling, harsh, and overly demanding.

James goes so far as to say that these heart attitudes—jealousy, selfish ambition—are demonic. That is strong stuff. And not only that, these attitudes give rise to “disorder and every vile practice.”

It comes from the inner man.

If the thinking, emotions, and will are evil then the behavior will be. It may be controlled sometimes out of necessity to keep the job or wife or the respect of others. But the evil will in the end get the best of the most self-controlled of leaders and there will be disorder and vile practices.

Where does oppressive behavior come from? It comes from the heart of man.

Therefore all attempts at coaching or counseling must be directed to the heart of man. It is not enough to give him a nicer suit or less angry words. You can’t dress him up from the outside.

Get to his heart.

The Gold Standard: When Unacceptable is Better than Those Others

Posted on by
Reply

In this little missive I am going to try to relate an interesting, but understandable, phenomenon in domestic abuse experience to the workaday world.

I have heard more than once from friends of survivors that the abuser is “not as bad as my husband . . . so he’s golden!”

We can’t help but contrast and compare our experiences with other’s. We either do so to build ourselves up or show how rough we have it. Either way, one comes out smelling better than another.

Well at least he doesn’t hit her

In the domestic violence world it is common to hear, “Well at least he doesn’t hit her.” But survivors of emotional abuse will come back with, “I wish he would hit me so I would have a bruise to show for it. Then maybe others would take my suffering seriously.”

Many people fail to recognize or make clear that any form of abuse is wrong. It is hurtful to the emotional, physical, and spiritual health of the victim. The pain of bruises and the agony of broken brain circuitry are simply different . . . but all of it is destructive and evil and can create long-term trauma.

So, that brings us to another problem: the isolating of victims because people don’t understand these truths. These comparisons are used to control the victims, particularly in Christian settings where divorce is rejected on abuse grounds.

I have heard things like, “When they don’t destroy things they must be gold . . . though they yell at and demean their partner.” Friends of one woman repeatedly attacked her because her husband isn’t “as bad as their own.” They will not admit that their own husbands are abusive. That would be too hard. So the victim is pushed outside the camp because she isn’t tough enough like her detractors are.

But, as my wife has said, “You don’t have to be strangling someone to choke the life out of them.” Though he may not yell as often or demean in the same way, it is evil.

Workplace Abuse?

How does this relate to leadership in the workplace?

We see the same dynamic in the organization when fellow leaders, boards, or even co-workers suggest that the boss—

  • Isn’t as bad as the last guy.
  • The boss is supposed to be a strong leader.
  • He may be a little rough around the edges.
  • He is the founder. He can do what he wants.
  • Corporate bosses are notoriously narcissistic.

All these excuses simply suggest that evil is good.

But Scripture does not take that view.

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)

Notice how that verse starts: “Woe”. That is a scary word that has a sense of “curse”. You do not want to be “woed”. But when you start suggesting that someone is not abusive in the home or workplace because he isn’t as bad as Hitler, you need to rethink your comparisons. You are asking for woes.

Particularly if you are being called on to give aid and comfort to a victim. And instead, you suggest their pain means nothing.

The Heart of [Abusive] Leadership: Becoming leaders with a desire for the good and the capacity to carry it out

Posted on by
Reply

The abuse of leadership does not just appear out of the blue.

It has roots and a heart.

When we talk about abuse, we talk about patterns of behavior—coercive, controlling, and punishing behaviors. But we do not stop there.

The Difficulty of Transformation

It is rooted deeply in the heart. Behaviors are simple outward manifestations of something much deeper.

Therefore, the way to transformation is through the heart; not a five-, ten-, or fifteen-step program of changed behavior.

When seeking change in an abusive leader, it must be kept in mind that he or she is deeply deceived.

The heart is deceitful above all things,
and desperately sick;
who can understand it?

Jeremiah 17:9 (ESV)

And this is why abuse advocates have so little confidence in the abusive leader to change.

Have you ever confronted an abuser? Did you see a humble recognition of their wicked heart? Did you see the dawning light in their eyes as they recognized their controlling heart and mean spirit? Did they even two days later come back to you and confess their thoughts of control and domination and ask forgiveness?

I know the answer to those rhetorical questions. At least 99% of the time.

Moral Concern for Others

So, how can transformation take place? How can an abusive leader be changed?

In a recent article by Kevin Brown in “The Dispatch“, the writer hit the nail on the head. Change is not through “thinly constituted reasoning”, as Brown puts it, but through “a story that shapes our moral imagination and directs our lives toward others.”

Brown says,

The Christian tradition has a word for this: discipleship. A call not merely to know what is right, but to become the kind of people who do the right thing. That is, both a desire for the good and the capacity to carry it out.

Real Virtue Has Roots by Kevin Brown

He noted that change in mankind—for good—comes through “discipleship”.

Brown says,

It is our day-to-day roots, not abstract reason, that will cultivate the virtuous life and our moral concern for others.

But discipleship means there is a “follower” who desires to learn from the one discipling him. And this again can be a nail in the coffin of transformation—most abusers don’t see it and so don’t think they need transformation. Why would they seek out discipleship?

The Ultimate Transformer

This is where Christ comes in . . . though He has been there all the time, mind you.

If Christ resurrected, this changes everything. All the maps have been redrawn. The world is upside down. Things are not as they seem. The truth of this story demands, says the hymnist, “my soul, my life, my all.”

Real Virtue Has Roots by Kevin Brown

It is only through Christ that a leader can even develop the desire to seek to know oneself; to know the sin that lies deeply hidden in his soul. To become a disciple.

This is the ultimate way that a leader will change his spots.

Yes, there are ways of seeking accountability: bringing pressure from boards; confrontations; firings; required batterer intervention programs. We have seen leaders seek heart change as a result of these accountability measures.

But ultimately, these only work when Christ chooses to bring pressure, confront, and bring consequences in order to discipline the toxic leader.

For if, because of [Adam’s] trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

Romans 5:17 (ESV)

We must rely upon Christ. Ultimately, transformation is His gift from Jesus Christ to the leader and organization and even the world around the leader.

Blessed is the man whom you discipline, O LORD,
and whom you teach out of your law.

Psalms 94:12 (ESV)

REFERENCE

Brown, Kevin, and Michael Reneau. “Real Virtue Has Roots.” The Dispatch, August 11, 2025. https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/dispatch-faith/virtue-morality-peter-singer-jemel-dunn/.

Ted’s Story: A Band of Brothers

Posted on by
Reply
https://open.spotify.com/episode/79gAD3m7ZXb8FliZuCW7H4?si=1fb702a7d75b4b1e

Ted’s story is hard to even start the telling. His story is a call to the church to be the church.

The brokenness of leadership in his denomination is so overwhelming that you begin to wonder if there is any real church left. Jesus’ church is redeemed and beautiful to Him, yet she so often acts as if she would have nothing to do with Him.

Jesus surely loves His bride, but at times I find that surprising.

Ted’s Story

It began several years ago when a committee was formed in Ted’s denomination’s regional leadership to investigate charges of sexual harassment against one of the pastors.

The committee, that acts a bit like a Grand Jury in the regional grouping of churches, presented a one-page summation of their investigation. They said they found no reason to move towards a trial as there were no strong reasons to suggest the pastor was guilty.

Ted found it strange that the summation said there was no guilt, but the committee provided “pastoral corrections” in the summation due to his “sexual misconduct.” He thought, “If there is no guilt, why would there be corrections to be made in his ministry?”

Ted and others asked for the full report—which was four pages long—but were refused. However, they discovered there had been one woman who acted as an “advisor” to the committee and she had published a “minority opinion.”

That sounded suspicious.

Ted began to speak with others, including women who were connected in some way to the case. In time, he determined he should stand up and be counted, filing a complaint with the regional leadership seeking justice for the women (multiple) who had reported the sexual misconduct.

In addition, he found that there had been multiple reports of impropriety against the pastor for at least five years before.

At this point, he told his wife, Rebecca that three things were going to happen:

  • There was going to be a huge move to exonerate the pastor.
  • He would be accused of having an affair with one of the women the pastor sexually harrassed.
  • It would all end with Ted being charged with something.

The Pastor’s Power Play

Ted’s complaint was refused and so he took it to the “supreme court” of his denomination for a ruling. That “court” upheld his complaint and ordered that a new investigative committee be appointed by the regional leadership.

However, a group of pastors suggested that an independent organization be hired by the regional leadership to investigate the charges. If they followed through, Ted would need to drop his charges against the pastor. He willingly did so that the independent investigators would have a free hand.

However, the regional leadership allowed the acccused pastor to speak at length and he convinced the leadership that the independent organization recommended was untrustworthy. His reason? He argued that they would support the victims.

He suggested that the regional leadership investigate and if they found guilt, then hire the independent group.

The pastor then convinced the leadership to appoint an investigative committee that had two lawyers on it. Then proceeded to convince them to put two lawyers on the committee whom he thought he had wrangled into his camp over the preceeding months.

In the end, his nearly hand-chosen committee found him guilty. But his personal lawyer, from one of the biggest law firms in the state, sought and obtained an immediate cease and desist order from the civil courts and stopped the process.

Contumacy

Men in the regional leadership then suggested bringing the pastor up on charges for his refusal to heed the ruling of the committee called “contumacy” (stubborn refusal to obey or comply with authority). In the rulebook of the denomination it states that a pastor who is found to be guilty of contumacy by the denominational “courts” must repent or be excommunicated.

The pastor wrote a letter that he was amending his lawsuit against parties in the denomination but that he was “not admitting guilt.” Ted stood before the leadership and asked if this was not a clear sign he was unrepentant.

Others rose to suggest that “repentance does not always involve admitting to sin.”

Really?

Ted was livid and suggested that the regional leadership organization be disolved and that their group of churches be melded into another regional grouping of churches because he said, “We will never, ever conduct a fair trial.” He wondered what the use of their regional leadership was if they could not judge fairly.

In the end, the highest court heard the case against the pastor and found him not guilty.

One of the parties involved in the case remarked, “This is a coverup and meant to send a message to the denomination that you never challenge a pastor.”

Band of Brothers

Ted shared with me the story of Mark, a pastor who had incredible influence in the regional leadership. He described him as one of the biggest narcissists he has ever seen. Twenty to thirty people have told him Mark was spiritually abusive.

When another pastor was brought up on charges Mark stood to support him, calling it an “injustice.” Ted was talking to him a year later and asked him about the pastor he had supported. Mark said the accused pastor was one of the worst pastors he had seen. He was “super legalistic, bad with people . . . Mark went on and on,” Ted said.

Ted asked, “Why did you fight his firing?”

Mark told him, “He is a pastor. We can’t allow elders in the churches to rule.”

But, Ted pressed, “He was abusive.” Mark replied, “Oh, I don’t doubt that at all. But we have to protect the regional leadership of pastors. It is a ‘band of brothers,'” referring to the movie by that name.

Ted told me he can point to at least four other cases of charges brought against pastors where the reaction was always to defend the pastor “even when indefensible.”

What Can We Say?

Ted said he has been re-reading “To Kill a Mockingbird” and is finding that someone who seeks justice in his denomination for those under pastoral abuse experience something akin to African Americans in the 50s.

It begins to look like Jesus before the Sanhedrin where the highest Jewish court repeatedly broke their own rules due to their own bias and blindness. Finding an innocent Jesus guilty; while drowning in His blood.

Or the leaders of Israel during the time of Ezekiel when the Lord calls them to account for their wicked leadership:

The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them. So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd, and they became food for all the wild beasts. My sheep were scattered. . . Ezekiel 34:4-5 (ESV)

The sheep are scattering. Much like Aaron’s warning.

When the leadership of God’s people reject His unmistakeable teaching to humbly serve His children, there will be unmeasurable harm done to the Church.

Ted’s story should be a clarion call to church leadership:

Repent or suffer the fate that you so desperately are trying to stave off—the scattering of God’s people.

How in the World

I asked Ted how in the world he has stood strong in the midst of all the attacks he has faced.

Ted noted that all three of the predictions he made to Rebecca have proven true.

  • As noted above, there was a huge movement to protect the erring pastor.
  • Ted was indeed accused of having an affair with one of the women who came forward to report the pastor’s sexual misconduct—even though Ted has only actually see her and the other women who reported maybe five times.
  • And charges have been filed against him in the church courts that he is currently battling.

Ted told me he has found solace and strength in three things:

  • Ted said his wife has been amazing. She has been his support and encouragement all along.
  • He enjoys a cohort of other pastors and Ted said they “have been rock solid friends through it all.” They have helped him write complaints, checked in on him periodically, and prayed with him often.
  • He sought out a Christian counselor. At one particular point the counselor suggested two things:
    1. Find an EMDR counselor as soon as possible. Ted said, “That has been huge.” This type of treatment for trauma has been incredibly helpful to many victims of abuse. See Bessel van der Kolk’s book here.
    2. And surprisingly the counselor suggested he find a Brazilian jiu jitsu gym. Ted said, “It was the greatest thing I have done.” He was amazed that the others in the club were so supportive of each other. He noted, “When there is a new guy, the advanced one’s job is to help him by submitting to him in the wrestling, showing him how to win.” He added, “If you try to hurt others, you will be kicked out of the gym immediately.”

I really was amazed by Ted’s mental and spiritual health despite all he has gone through.

Quite frankly, I cannot imagine being where he is if I had suffered all he has to advocate for victims of such horrendous leadership.

Saul’s False Apology: Seeking Repentance from an Abuser

Posted on by
Reply
https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/kelly-dehnert/episodes/Sauls-False-Apology-Seeking-Repentance-from-an-Abuser-e2lv4gg

Recently, a survivor of domestic violence shared an apology letter her abuser had written to her. It sounded pretty good.

But, as most who have dealt with an abuser, she was not taken in by the carefully chosen sweet words.

In 1st Samuel 26 we see a false apology by King Saul.

Then Saul said, “I have sinned. Return, my son David, for I will no more do you harm, because my life was precious in your eyes this day. Behold, I have acted foolishly, and have made a great mistake.”

1 Samuel 26:21

Saul had been chasing David seeking to kill him. In this passage, David has snuck up on King Saul, giving David the opportunity to end the chase by killing Saul. But rather than killing Saul, he gave him opportunity to repent of his evil.

Saul seems deeply moved by David’s grace and admits he acted foolishly.

Sounds good, but it is a much harder thing to say, “I envied you, David. I had hatred in my heart for you. I desired your death.”

Each of the italicized words are heart words. They are the spring from which grow the evil fruit we all produce. These come from the heart; and what I mean by heart is the whole of the inner man—cognitive and emotive.

But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander.

Matthew 15:18-19 (ESV)

Out of the depths of man come the evil we act upon.

So, when an apology is made for actions that have crushed others, it is appropriate for the apology to give attention to from where that evil action came. “I was chasing you, David because I was envious and hateful.”

“I was harsh with my Assistant Pastor because I envied his skills.”

The Difficulty of Real Apologies

The reason we don’t hear real apologies is because it is very hard to give them.

To bring our inner evil to light just takes too much humility and self-awareness. Imagine an abusive leader whose entitlement and power is so much of their substance and identity; how can they humbly admit to such wickedness?

It is difficult for the average Joe. Just imagine how difficult it is for the one who is so unwilling to dive deeply into his own heart and air out the stench contained there.

It is interesting, as you read on in 1st Samuel; David is not taken in by Saul’s apology. The text goes on to record David’s thoughts:

“Now I shall perish one day by the hand of Saul. There is nothing better for me than that I should escape to the land of the Philistines.”

1 Samuel 27:1

There is more than one place where David shows his insight to Saul’s wickedness. I wrote earlier about how Jonathan—Saul’s son—was taken in by Saul’s apologies. But David is not.

What Are We to Do?

There is One Who is omniscient—the Lord God Almighty. He knows the heart—the whole inner being of man—and He knows whether or not an apology is truly from the heart.

Because of that, we must not make judgments beyond what is clearly evident. Though we make judgments of the heart on a regular basis—our laws are in part based on them (1st degree murder as opposed to manslaughter) —it is something we must do carefully and with good evidence in hand. Yes, we can logically assume when someone does great evil, that since great evil comes out of the heart, there is great evil intended.

Yet, because there can be unintended evil actions and therefore, not coming from evil intent, we cannot ultimately be perfect judges of inner character. We are not omniscient and do not fully see the inner man.

Give it Time

Therefore I recommend the following perspectives to those who have received apologies from their toxic leader:

  1. It might be true,
  2. or it might be false,
  3. we are not omniscient,
  4. so it does not change anything,
  5. and to know the answer to 1) or 2) it takes time for the fruit of repentance to be evident.

Numbers one, two, and three are obvious; it is only God who knows the heart and so we cannot ultimately—in this life—know if an apology is truly true or not. Though Scripture makes clear that Christians may make some judgments based on the outward works of others (Matt. 12:33-37), it also makes clear we must be very, very careful doing so (Jam. 4:12).

We must not claim omniscience.

So, an apology initially does not really change anything.

We do not know for certain that the abusive individual is truly confessing his sin or simply trying to manipulate his victims, those to whom they are accountable, and/or onlookers. So, we must continue to press forward with what we believe the LORD is calling us to do in the meantime.

Leaders should not be placed back on their platform until their apparent repentance becomes true repentance. That takes time; so give it time.

Because we do not know the heart of the abuser, and we have suffered great harm, it is acting responsibly to be wary of their confession. It is certainly reasonable to accept it as given, while unnecessary to proclaim they have repented and place ourselves under their control prematurally.

Get to a safe place, and give it time for the fruit of repentance to be evident—or not.

Fret Not for Vindication: Be Still and Wait Patiently

Posted on by
2

Those of us who have faced abusive leadership in the home or workplace know the ever-present desire for validation and vindication. We want others to stand beside us, seeing our hurt, and for the abusive individual to be judged—in either God’s court or human courts.

Like the writers of many of the psalms in Scripture, we can go a long time waiting for either of these outcomes.

King David knew the hatred of men. He spoke of a close friend whose

speech was smooth as butter,
yet war was in his heart;
his words were softer than oil,
yet they were drawn swords.

Psalms 55:21 (ESV)

That one who was intimate with him—he shared in “sweet counsel” with him—was deceptive and hateful.

I am sure that David wanted immediate wrath. He wanted justice done. And yet, he wrote a psalm that pushes pause.

Be still before the LORD and wait patiently for him;
fret not yourself over the one who prospers in his way,
over the man who carries out evil devices!
8 Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath!
Fret not yourself; it tends only to evil.
9 For the evildoers shall be cut off,
but those who wait for the LORD shall inherit the land.

Psalms 37:7-9 (ESV)1

Be still.

Fret not.

Refrain from anger.

Wait for the LORD.

It is evident in the psalm that the victim of the wicked will have his day. “. . . there is a future for the man of peace.” But, “transgressors shall be altogether destroyed; the future of the wicked shall be cut off.”

Vindication will come, but now is a time of patience and stillness. We are called to refrain from the debilitating curse of stewing in anger and trust the LORD, who will judge with righteousness.

Not an Easy Task

But of course, saying it does not make it so.

Whoever wrote Psalm 119 knew this:

How long must your servant endure?
When will you judge those who persecute me?

Psalms 119:84 (ESV)

How long? When?

There is no need to beat yourself up over the feelings of hurt, distrust, and impatience. God’s people have from time past suffered the same feelings of dispair. Some of that hurt is encapsalated in God’s Word as an example to us.

Where to Turn

The same writer of Psalms 119 tells us in every verse (except one) that we turn to His Word—in New Testament fulfillment, Jesus—for the healing of those hurts and the patience to endure.

My soul melts away for sorrow;
strengthen me according to your word!

Psalms 119:28 (ESV)

I am melting. But I am God’s child. I am blessed with all the heavenly blessings (Eph. 1:3).

Though I do not feel it at the moment, I know it to be true because Jesus told me so. I can rest in His promise, though I cannot see ten feet in front of me.

Even though the board of directors ignores my plea to bring accountability to the CEO. Even though the church elders do not see the abuse the pastor is heaping upon his flock. Even though the judge fails to take into account the damage my husband has been inflicting upon my soul.

Jesus loves His little children . . . and His justice will prevail.

Be still.

Fret not.

Wait on the LORD.

For the evildoers shall be cut off, but those who wait for the LORD shall inherit the land.

NOTES

  1. For those of you interested in further study in Psalm 37, this is a very good article on the Hebrew of Psalm 37 passed on by a friend of Pearls and Swine: https://tyndalehouse.com/explore/articles/reading-the-psalms-in-hebrew/ ↩︎

Job’s Counselors: The Misuse of Spiritual Influence

Posted on by
Reply

For many the book of Job in the Bible is a pandora’s box of interpretive difficulty.

If you are a black-and-white thinker, it is difficult to read, I imagine.

But Job is a very good place to go to understand more clearly how the counseling of victims of abuse in the home, workplace, or church has gone seriously wrong.

It is helpful to know the beginning and the end before wading into the middle.

In the story of Job—who was horribly tried by Satan at the approval of the LORD—moans in the agony of having lost all his children, his means of income, and is suffering terrible physical ailments.

In the end, his friends are called to account for their poor—sinful—counsel of Job.

So, now we wade into the middle. Because of Job’s suffering, his spiritual counselors are laying one guilt trip after another on him.

In their black-and-white thinking, they believe God blesses those who live righteously and curses those who break His laws. Because Job—who had been richly blessed prior to Satan’s destruction—is suffering horribly, his counselors think he must be cursed by God and therefore he must be living in sin.

Trial = Sin

This is not unfounded in Scripture and why some in their black-and-white beliefs grab and go with it in their thinking and counseling.

In Deuteronomy 28, Moses lays before God’s people the blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience.

For those who obey the LORD:

Blessed shall you be in the city, and blessed shall you be in the field. 4 Blessed shall be the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your ground and the fruit of your cattle, the increase of your herds and the young of your flock. 5 Blessed shall be your basket and your kneading bowl. 6 Blessed shall you be when you come in, and blessed shall you be when you go out . . . etc.
Deuteronomy 28:3-6 (ESV)

For those who disobey:

Cursed shall you be in the city, and cursed shall you be in the field. 17 Cursed shall be your basket and your kneading bowl . . . etc.
Deuteronomy 28:16-17 (ESV)

It Isn’t So Clear

I use the terms “black-and-white” in a negative way, because when it comes to blessings and curses, Scripture is not as clear on this topic as Deuteronomy 28 would lead you to believe.

It is indeed true that those who reject the LORD in unbelief and arrogance are cursed. But that curse may largely be seen in the judgment they face at the end of life for their rejection of their Creator, not in the middle. This idea is apparent in the story of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19f) and in multiple places in the Proverbs.

Jesus tells a parable in Luke 16 about the rich man and Lazarus:

“There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.”

Luke 16:19-23 (ESV)

Notice that the rich man, who rejected his God, lived a life of sumptuous feasting every day. On the other hand, Lazarus was a poor man. Yet, the rich man ends up in Hell and Lazarus in Heaven.

We see in Proverbs:

Better is a poor man who walks in his integrity
than a rich man who is crooked in his ways.
Proverbs 28:6 (ESV)

Deuteronomy would lead us to believe—if we don’t look anywhere else—that the “poor” —therefore the suffering—is walking in sin rather than “integrity,” yet Proverbs 28 suggests that it is the “rich man” who is “crooked” —living in sin. How did he get “blessed” if he was disobedient?

But that is the flow of Scripture. There are proverbial statements that in this life are generally true, but the end of the story is where it all leads. The wicked, unbelieving rich man will end up in torment when his life is ended, but torment will possibly only be when that end of life judgment comes.

And conversely, the poor—unblessed in the world’s eyes—will face many trials in this life but in his faithfulness to the LORD be blessed abundently in the judgment. His poverty is not necessarily because of disobedience as we consider the whole of Scripture.

This brings me to Job’s counselors.

Worm Theology

At one point, Bildad, one of Job’s “friends” who was counseling him when he in torment, explained to Job that in his sin, man is a “maggot” or a “worm.”

4 How then can man be in the right before God?
How can he who is born of woman be pure?
5 Behold, even the moon is not bright,
and the stars are not pure in his eyes;
6 how much less man, who is a maggot,
and the son of man, who is a worm!”
Job 25:4-6

In the sense that we are deeply depraved as sinful human beings, wandering about in rebellion and foolishness, Bildad was right. Some complain about “worm theology” but there is biblical truth in it when considering our deep brokenness. Romans 3:9-13 confirms this understanding of man’s depravity.

However, Job’s counselors—not just Bildad—came at Job from a Deuteronomy 28 theology, not a full-on-biblical theology of suffering. This is how many counselors of abuse victims approach those victims. They look for the “fault” in the victim that brought the horrible treatment. They seek to “help” the victim see their own sin and turn from it. They can’t believe a Christian leader could be so sinful as to lie, manipulate, and intentionally crush those under their care.

Abuse is Never the Fault of the Abused

However, these judgments are beyond the purview of biblical counseling.

First of all, abuse victims are never at fault. If the counselor understands the roots of abuse, they will understand that victims never bring it on, but rather the abuser will simply abuse because it is in his heart.

In addition, there are professing Christians who are very depraved and cause incredible destruction.

They will coerce and control in order to fulfill their entitlement in this life. Often they get away with it like the rich man who got his wealth through evil. It seems like they can’t lose, especially to the victim as she sits helplessly by watching the abusive leader convince the board, friends, and stakeholders that he is the good guy in this scenario.

When you receive reports of abuse from a friend, co-worker, or congregant member listen carefully. Stay clear of Christian platitudes like, “You need to give grace. We are all worms and he needs grace just like you do.”

Abuse is not normal relational conflict between husband and wife, boss and subordinate, pastor and deacon, or teacher and student. The conflict is in the heart of the abuser. And never because of the victim’s sin.