It is a hard topic for Christians to wrap their heads around. Interpretations of these prayers for destruction abound.
In this article I am looking at Nehemiah’s imprecatory prayer. The ESV Strong’s Bible translation says in its introduction to the book of Nehemiah:
In 445 B.C. the Persian King Artaxerxes sent Nehemiah, an Israelite who was a trusted official, to help rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. With Nehemiah went the third wave of returning Jewish exiles. There was intense opposition from the other peoples in the land and disunity within Jerusalem. Despite this opposition, Nehemiah led the rebuilding of the walls.
ESV Strongs Bible
That “intense opposition” made many fear for their lives as they worked to rebuild the walls around Jerusalem. Nehemiah, as the leader of the Jews who sought to see the Covenant God had made with His people Israel re-established, gave instructions to the people to take protective measures. “Each of the builders had his sword strapped at his side while he built.” (Nehemiah 4:18)
And so they built. With their weapons handy.
The Imprecatory Prayer of Nehemiah
What was particularly interesting to me is found in chapter 4 of the historical account.
Sanballat, of whom we know very little, was a Horonite (possibly from Samaria). He was apparently the leader of those who opposed the rebuilding of the wall. He and his ilk ridiculed the Jews and sought to stop them.
They shamed and humiliated Nehemiah and the Jews. The language in the text is strikingly similar to how those who are under abusive leadership describe their taunters. Toxic leaders in the home, workplace, and church torment their targets with words that belittle, debase, and humiliate. Often those words are coupled with religious language that creates a greater depth of shame and humiliation in the target (spiritual abuse).
Nehemiah responded in prayer . . . just as he had done before approaching King Artaxerxes to request returning to Jerusalem to build the wall (Nehemiah 1). In his prayer here in chapter 4, Nehemiah expressed his desire that the Jews’ tormentors be destroyed.
Nehemiah prays,
Hear, O our God, for we are despised. Turn back their taunt on their own heads and give them up to be plundered in a land where they are captives. 5 Do not cover their guilt, and let not their sin be blotted out from your sight, for they have provoked you to anger in the presence of the builders.
Nehemiah 4:4-5
No Qualifying
When I normally speak of “imprecatory praying” I give qualifications. Before praying, “Destroy my enemies,” I will pray, “Lord change their heart . . . “
Then I go on with asking the Lord to stop the abusive individual in whatever way the Lord, in His wisdom, wills. I try not to be too specific.
But Nehemiah, in a display of raw emotion, simply asks the Lord to destroy this enemy of God’s people.
Fundamental to his prayer is the understanding that his enemies are enemies of God. Nehemiah was confident of God’s anger at Sanballat. There appears to be no doubt in his mind that Sanballat, and those following him, were evil and that God was opposed to them.
And his prayer is not self-centered. Nehemiah is not praying against someone who simply disagrees with him. He is praying that an enemy of God and one who seeks the destruction of God’s people be stopped.
Dead. In his tracks. No redemption.
That is hard stuff.
But it is the hard stuff from which imprecatory praying grows. Imprecatory prayers are made for those who see no out from the destruction at the hands of evil men. They are the prayers of deeply wounded and hurting people . . . because of the unjust, wicked, and damaging treatment of others.
Forgiveness?
In addition, I want to point out that Nehemiah is not unforgiving as some might think in praying this prayer.
In praying, Nehemiah turns over the judgment upon his (and God’s) enemy, Sanballat to God. This is fundamental to forgiveness. Forgiveness does not necessarily mean there is no judgment. But rather, as some theologians suggest, it is turning over that judgment to the Lord; releasing our own judgment into the hands of God.
Nehemiah prays for God to judge. Afterall, it is God’s place to judge.
It’s Just So Uncomfortable
There are a significant number of imprecatory prayers in Scripture. So often we gloss over them because they make us uncomfortable.
Because we have so often been taught that a good Christian would never ask the Lord to judge someone, we cannot reconcile the imprecatory prayers found throughout the Psalms and here in Nehemiah with that training.
But those who have suffered abuse may not have as much difficulty understanding why they are in Scripture. Imprecatory prayers are actually a balm to those for whom the Lord continually stands up. We have God’s own word that He despises those who oppress others. And these prayers are a means of turning over the judgment we feel is so needed to the Lord Who judges perfectly.
Why should we not join Nehemiah in asking the the Lord to do what He has promised He will do?
The LORD is a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble. 10 And those who know your name put their trust in you, for you, O LORD, have not forsaken those who seek you.
Every time I tell the story of someone’s experience under toxic leadership, I am challenged to be more like Jesus.
Recently I read a blog that was bemoaning what the author said was the “proliferation of what some people have dubbed ‘scandal porn’ . . .”1
His argument? “. . . of course, there are bad pastors, and they should be refused the responsibility of leadership among God’s beloved flock. But has the focus on bad pastors been overdone?“
In his blog, the answer is yes. The author suggested that the world (unbelievers) will “cast as negative a light as possible upon Christian pastors,” but he considers it troubling that Christians would do so.
Biblically speaking, the church is, in fact, called specifically to judge within the ranks according to Paul in 1 Corinthians 5:12-13. It should be God’s people calling to the light the darkness of pastoral abuse.
It is our job.
So, to imply that we leave the criticism for the watching, unbelieving world is contrary to our calling. I would suggest that if we take up the mantle of critically evaluating abusive leadership as a church, the watching world will have nothing to watch but our own humble self-awareness bringing glory to Jesus.
There are Good Pastors
The blogger says there are many good pastors. I agree.
“In 35 years of vocational ministry, I have known very few people who can honestly say that they were bullied or abused by their pastor. Again, their stories are real and heart-breaking. No instance of a bad pastor abusing a church member is tolerable. But given the massive number of churches, pastors, and church members, such cases are not nearly as common as the attention given to them suggests.”
And so, the author says,
“What I am calling for is careful consideration as to whether we have made too much of the bully pastor while irresponsibly neglecting the far more common reality of the bullied and wounded pastor. Has the glut of material dedicated to diagnosing and exposing bad pastors been recklessly unaccompanied and counterweighted by the far less interesting fact that most of us have good pastors?”
I will skip over the unsupportable statement that there are far more bullied and wounded pastors than bullying and wounding pastors. I know of no statistics to support either view, so I see no sense in arguing it. He could be right . . . or not. Who am I to say?
Greater Accountability
In the past seven years, I have interviewed dozens of those who have suffered under toxic leadership in the church or Christian organization. I have talked with dozens more informally. Abusive leadership is not a blip on the radar.
But more importantly than my own experience, we need to allow Scripture to speak. Church leaders are to be held more accountable. There is a reason why there is a focus on bad leaders in social media and blogs. Light must be shown on dark places and in particular on those who lead God’s people.
The Westminster Larger Catechism, written in a time (1600s) that authority was viewed as more important than in our own culture (and therefore more likely abusive authority was given a pass), says this:
Question. 151 What are those aggravations that make some sins more heinous [more wicked] than others? Answer. Sins receive their aggravations 1. From the persons offending: if they be of riper age, greater experience or grace, eminent for profession, gifts, place, office, guides to others, and whose example is likely to be followed by others.
WLC 151 on Aggravations That Make Sins More Heinous
A leader in the Assembly’s analysis is one “whose example is likely to be followed by others.” This is a person of influence.
The answer goes on to list a number of other reasons why a sin is more henious in both content and context. However, the first listed is that of a leader – either in a formal or informal position. When a leader sins, it has more impact on others and is therefore more heinous.
Judged with Greater Strictness
James says, “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness (James 3:1).”
Those who are teachers, those who labor in preaching and teaching in our congregations, have incredible influence on those they lead. Despite our “question authority” culture, pastors continue to be held in high esteem and those under their care are most often hesitant to question the authority of the pastor’s words.
This is my experience in all those interviews and discussions. Because they have so much influence, James says they will be “judged with greater strictness.”
On the other hand, according to Scripture (1 Tim. 5:17), church leaders are to be honored. However, Scritpure makes it clear this honor is due as long as they live up to the standards the Lord has given for those who lead.
Church leaders’ words are incredibly important but those words must come from Christian character that is also described in God’s Word (see 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-16). In those two places, it is clear that their leadership will be judged more stringently by the Lord than their congregants’ daily lives. And those standards are very high.
Hear what the Lord says about bad pastors – or, I would suggest, any abusive leader of God’s people:
“. . . therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD: 10 Thus says the Lord GOD, Behold, I am against the shepherds, and I will require my sheep at their hand and put a stop to their feeding the sheep. No longer shall the shepherds feed themselves. I will rescue my sheep from their mouths, that they may not be food for them.“
Ezekiel 34:9-10 (ESV)
The entirety of Ezekiel 34 was God’s judgment upon the shepherds of Israel who were toxic. It is descriptive of shepherds who are harsh, uncaring, and self-serving. The Lord will “rescue” His sheep from them . . . take them away.
Diagnose and Expose
As the author of the blog noted, there are abusive pastors. But he minimizes it with the abuse that others heap upon leaders:
“I have never spoken to a pastor who has not been mistreated, slandered, undermined, or run off by church members, an associate pastor, elders, deacons, or all of the above.”
Did you notice how many of those (who mistreated the pastor) he listed are leaders? Associate pastors? Elders? Deacons? It sounds as though there are many leaders out there who should be held accountable for their abuse of fellow leaders.
The author goes on,
“Has the glut of material dedicated to diagnosing and exposing bad pastors been recklessly unaccompanied and counterweighted by the far less interesting fact that most of us have good pastors?“
I would suggest that it is very important to dedicate ourselves to “diagnosing and exposing bad pastors” because we do not want to mix the wheat with the tares.
The elders in my own church receive a significant amount of encouragement from members, not only during October’s “Pastor Appreciation Month.” But, we must do a good job of identifying bad ones and hold them accountable. Those of us who focus on abusive leadership have no intention of mixing the wheat with the tares; ie. bringing down good pastors with the bad.
I hope that as I write about wicked leadership, telling the stories of those who have suffered under it, the church learns to identify what truly abusive is, and what it is not, so that God’s own judgment on abusive leaders will be realized and congregations saved from evil leadership.
And as a result good leaders will be warned just as Paul tells Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:19-20. I am continually learning from my research where I fail in my own leadership. I hope that good pastors are reading these various blogs and taking steps to stay on the narrow way by God’s grace.
A Critique
The blogger ended his article with a list of actions taken by pastors that we should not confuse with abuse. It is his attempt to help his readers stay clear of a misdiagnosis of toxic leadership.
I would like to evaluate a few of them. All of them have value. But, in most cases, there are qualifying considerations that should not be overlooked and by making these statements the blogger may be giving a pass to what can be abusive practices. As one friend noted, some of these actions can be good things, but they could also easily be weaponized by abusive leaders to harm their congregants.
I will give some, not all, of his bullet-points followed by my analysis. [You can read all of them in his blog noted below]:
Being led is not in itself abuse, but it can be abusive and it cannot be taken for granted that a leader, who suffers from his own sin, will not be abusive simply because he is a leader. If you read on to verses 19 and 20 in 1 Timothy 5 you will note that those who abuse their positions of leadership may be called out before the whole congregation that others may be warned.
But it can be. I have seen multiple cases of authoritarian behaviors by church leaders that were used simply to control and manipulate members who disagreed with them. I have seen multiple women excommunicated for reporting the abuse of their husbands, many of whom were leaders in the church. I have also seen men who reported abusive pastors excommunicated. When leaders act in these ways, they are practicing abusive leadership. If you excommunicate, you better be right and biblical and doing it in love.
Both the Mark and Timothy passages are, in fact, challenges to leaders. In Mark, Jesus is challenging Peter, a leader and Apostle of the early church, (“Get thee behind me Satan”). In Timothy, Paul is telling Timothy to rebuke an elder who persists in sin. It is a passage giving instructions to rebukeabusive leadership. The Titus passage is a good proof text for the author. However, keep in mind, exhortation and rebuke must always be done in love (1 John 4:7).
Being expected to follow leadership is not abuse (Hebrews 13:17).
I have not spoken with any victim of leadership abuse who would disagree with this. But, as those who “watch for your souls, as they that must give account,” their watching better be biblical, just, and loving for they will “give an account” for their leadership attitudes and actions. We do not need to follow ungodly leadership. In fact, we are told to call them out (1 Tim. 5:20). Being expected to follow abusive leadership is abuse.
Being told you need to mature spiritually is not abuse (Hebrews 5:11).
Shepherding takes more than commanding someone to be better. I am not sure that the preacher (writer of Hebrews) would make this kind of bullet-point statement to pastors to let their congregations have it between the eyes. Consider what 1 Peter 5:3 says: “not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock.” Peter’s charge is that elders should be an example, not simply telling their congregations what’s what.
Being confronted in your sin is not abuse (1 Timothy 5:20)
It can be. This has to be qualified. Spiritual abuse is a pattern (repeated actions) of attempts “to exert power and control over someone using religion, faith, or beliefs.”(PCA DASA Report) Confrontations may be for this purpose and so the motives of the leader need to be considered. Often, shame is a particular tool of an abusive leader. It is not adequate to simply say “being confronted for your sin is not abuse.” It certainly can be.
Being rebuked for holding to errant doctrine is not abuse (Titus 1:9, 13).
“He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it (Titus 1:9).” Note the beginning of the verse. He better be holding firm to what the Word teaches first and how he rebukes can even, when correcting theology, be abusive. It only takes a cursory reading of the Gospels to see the spiritual abuse of the Pharisees. They said many biblical things, but were abusive. Job’s counselors said many biblical things, but were spiritually abusive.
I would be very careful in the use of this term “expected.” The term can be used abusively in that the Hebrews passage uses more positive terms – ie. “encouraging one another.” Is the leader encouraging his members to love the church, God’s bride, or is he trying to shame them into attending? Many people have been deeply wounded by church leadership and need more than another “strong” voice telling them to return. Jesus speaks kindly to his downtrodden flock and leaders are called to follow his example (John 13). If your members aren’t attending, maybe you need to ask why? Could it be a fulfillment of Ezekiel 34? Has Jesus himself scattered them because of your leadership?
True, as long as they are honorable. No authority of God’s creatures is absolute (Acts 4:19). Only God’s authority is absolute because he is always right. Leaders in God’s church must win this honor as is evident by instructions for picking elders and deacons. Leaders are not made by their position, but rather rise to the position by their maturity. They must be trustworthy if they are to be obeyed.
Discovering that your pastor can, at times, be in a bad mood is not abuse.
This statement is particularly concerning. What does the leader do when he is in a bad mood? How does that impact his ministry? If he is not temperate in his “mood” then he is not called to be a leader of God’s people as evidenced by the qualifications given in Scripture. Does he show the fruit of the Spirit by immediately repenting and making restitution when that bad mood is expressed in anger?
Summary
Identifying abusive leaders is similar to identifying abuse in the home. “Domestic abuse can be defined as a form of oppression in which one spouse controls and dominates the other through a pattern of coercive, controlling, and punishing behaviors (PCA DASA Report Section Two).”
Notice that it is a “pattern,” not one-offs. If a Christian leader acts this way on a regular basis he is not qualified to lead God’s people. We must bring him to the light both that he may be stopped from damaging God’s people and from a poor witness to Christ in the watching world.
And, that others may be warned and learn from his bad example.
I love to hear stories of pastors who are seeking the good of their flock. I love to hear about the compassion and empathy of shepherds who lead like Jesus. It is encouraging to my own growth and perspective on Christ’s church.
But, amidst all the ravages of broken leadership that we are continually hearing about, there are important lessons for all of us who lead. I need to hear those stories. Every time I write one of these blogs or tell someone’s story, I am challenged to be the godly leader Jesus calls me to be.
Those who make themselves complicit with toxic leadership will often do so due to fear of loss of prominence or privilage. These are the middle-managers in Christian organizations, businesses, and churches.
One of the most captivating stories in Scripture is the book of Esther. In ten chapters of moving narrative, Esther provides the plot of an epic drama. The twists and turns of God’s sovereign reign in care of His people even while having exiled them for their idolatry, always keeps me fixated to the end.
The story also captures a common problem with toxic leadership.
So often those who lead under the oversight of toxic leaders are complicit with their leader. For a number of reasons they do evil right alongside the head of their organization, business, or church.
An Object for Display
In Esther’s story, Memucan, a manager in King Ahasuerus’s government, saw Queen Vasthti refuse to come like a slave to the king when he commanded her presence. The king wanted her to come “in order to show the peoples and the princes her beauty, for she was lovely to look at (Esther 1:11).”
Memucan realized his own power and position may be in jeopardy with the Queen’s refusal to obey King Ahasuerus’s making of her an object and display to his subordinates.
King Ahasuerus asked his subordinates who were present,
“According to the law, what is to be done to Queen Vashti, because she has not performed the command of King Ahasuerus delivered by the eunuchs?”
Esther 1:15
Memucan told the king:
“Not only against the king has Queen Vashti done wrong, but also against all the officials and all the peoples who are in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus. For the queen’s behavior will be made known to all women, causing them to look at their husbands with contempt, since they will say, ‘King Ahasuerus commanded Queen Vashti to be brought before him, and she did not come.’ This very day the noble women of Persia and Media who have heard of the queen’s behavior will say the same to all the king’s officials, and there will be contempt and wrath in plenty.”
Esther 1:16b-18
Can you imagine that? Other women will see her unwillingness to be treated as property and think it is okay to refuse authoritarianism. In the end, others who have authority, like Memucan, will lose that authority to boss and abuse their own wives.
Analogous with Toxic Complicity
This is an analogy of complicity with toxic leadership, not just poor marital behavior.
There are a variety of reasons why those who act as “middle-managers” in the workplace will refuse to seek accountability for their boss and become complicit in their abuse.
Loss of Prestige for Boards: Members of boards fear the loss of prestige if their leader is the focus of a public scandal. So, they cover it up.
Access to the Leader and Power: Managers fear a loss of access to a leader, from whom they have been empowered, if they report / whistleblow abusive leadership.
Donor Support: Fundraisers may fear being caught supporting a badly run organization and so would rather just keep it quiet . . . continually praising the health of the organization.
Bad Witness: Assistant Pastors may continue to support a wicked Senior Pastor because suggesting he is broken and unworthy of leadership will be a bad witness to the world.
Common Goal: One particular church leader “was picked with the goal of growing the congregation,” and so the “main goal was to keep him as pastor.”1
“Image management” may create difficulty for subordinates to see the leader for who he or she really is. “Weick (1988) and Maitlis and Sonehnshein (2010) found that strong, optimistic statements and justifications produce blind spots that keep organizations from seeing contradictory cues and pieces of evidence. Followers also feel as if they must be bound to those positive outlooks.”2 In other words, subordinates struggle to keep clear sight when their leader has brainwashed them with positive think.
No Access: A close cousin to this positive think is subordinates being continually fed the leader’s narrative and never considering the victims’. Boards are notorious for this kind of mismanagement, as the board of our own mission was. They willingly allowed themselves to be kept from access to the stories of the missionaries and nationals who were being mistreated by the leaders of the mission.
And there are other reasons.
Most, if not all of them are bad.
It is not worth it to be complicit in these ways with abusive leadership. The organizational damage will be much worse because more lives will be broken and damaged by the leader the longer he or she remains at the helm.
I have often heard survivors of abusive leaders in the home and workplace confess their sins and in some way suggest the abuse they are living under is somehow a necessary result of their sin. There tends to be an immediate response to hardship (trial), by those who humbly follow the Lord, that there is a tit for tat in the workings of God’s sovereignty.
I am suffering = God is punishing me for my sin.
“I am sinful and so all this abuse has come upon me because of my sin.”
Mind you, it is not that there is no biblical evidence for such a view. Such as,
“When your people Israel are defeated before the enemy because they have sinned against you, and if they turn again to you and acknowledge your name and pray and plead with you in this house, then hear in heaven and forgive the sin of your people Israel and bring them again to the land that you gave to their fathers.”
1 Kings 8:33-34 (ESV)
We certainly suffer because sin of our own making brings about a world of hurt. God uses the evil of others to discipline us. We need self-awareness.
The Sin of Others
But, there are also those times that we face trial not due to our own sin but simply because of the sin of others. Even though as Solomon says in this same prayer in 1 Kings 8 “for there is no one who does not sin,” it is also biblical to interpret trials as not necessarily of our own making.
The wickedness of the abuser’s heart brings all kinds of trouble on those whom he desires to control, manipulate, and crush (oppress).
And this should not be interpreted as the result of the victim’s sin . . . ever.
Aaron Hann’s recent Thesis 96 blog called “Spiritual Abuse Tactics in John’s Gospel” beautifully captures the spiritual abuse found in John 9. There a man, blind from birth, is healed by Jesus. Suddenly, he became the focus of spiritual abuse by the Pharisees. They said, “Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner” in verse 24 of that chapter. Tit for tat.
Jesus’ disciples say, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” [John 9:1-2 (ESV)]
He is suffering, so he (or his parent who bore him) is a sinner. Tit for tat.
Jesus responds that it doesn’t work that way. “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him.” He says, do not make that correlation. In another place the Lord says, “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.” (Is. 50:20)
Mr. Hann skillfully picks the Pharisees’ abuse apart and I encourage you to read his analysis.
A Helpful Example: Psalm 38
In Psalm 38, King David cries out to the Lord, confessing his sin but then seeking his release from the abusive treatment of others. Hear a section of the Psalm:
For I am ready to fall, and my pain is ever before me. 18 I confess my iniquity; I am sorry for my sin. 19 But my foes are vigorous, they are mighty, and many are those who hate me wrongfully. 20 Those who render me evil for good accuse me because I follow after good. 21 Do not forsake me, O LORD! O my God, be not far from me! 22 Make haste to help me, O Lord, my salvation!
Psalm 38:17-22 (ESV)
Note, David’s confession in verse 18 and then his desire for vindication in verses 19 through 22.
David confesses, “I am sorry for my sin,” and then goes on to say that “many are those who hate me wrongfully.”
I cannot count the times that a victim of abuse has confessed their own sins to me as though it was their sin that created the abuse. But as David notes, their hatred is wrong. It is not due to his sin . . . it is just wrong.
Deal With the Elephant
We must be very careful that we do not create a tit for tat response to the humility of victims of leadership abuse and focus on their sin while missing the elephant in the room.
That elephant is the wickedness of a leader who does not share that humility.
It is rare that abusive leaders will ever humbly admit real sin like the victim will. They may be self-deprecating, saying they feel badly that they have hurt the victim. But, you will not hear them say, “I am so sorry that I have a wicked heart and have thought of the victim as less than human.”
But, this is in fact the heart of the abuser . . . and mind you, their abusiveness comes from the very depths of their being.
All the while, the victim is confessing their sin, beating their breast like the tax collector (Luke 18:9-14), taking the abuse upon themselves as if it is a punishment for their own sins.
Hear the confession of the survivor of abuse. But, always seek the heart of the problem and that is in the heart of the abuser, not the victim. Do not be distracted by the wiles of the abuser as he projects his sin upon his victim.
And do not be distracted by the humility of the victim and miss the elephant in the room. The sin of the abuser.
Having come from a long line of pastors—father, grandfather, and uncle—his calling to the ministry seemed a natural consequence of being born into his family.
Following Bible college and a stint with a traveling ministry, Aaron joined the staff of a large church with a well-known and “successful” pastor. Pastor Gene had been in the ministry for nearly 50 years and had served at all levels of leadership within Aaron’s denomination. Aaron said he and his wife, Joyce trusted him like a grandpa.
Aaron joined the staff as a music minister. He considered it his “dream job” and Joyce was hired in the youth ministry.
I could tell in our discussion that Aaron was the dream employee. A self-described “people-pleaser” and “rule-follower,” he was eager to please both his senior pastor and congregation. He clearly had a heart for ministry.
Just the Way He Is
But, after two years of serving in the church, Aaron came home to his wife and shared with her, “I think Pastor Gene has a man-crush on me.”
Aaron explained that Pastor Gene would do subtle things.
They would go out to coffee and Aaron noticed that when he would put his hand on the table, Pastor Gene would put his hand on Aaron’s. Taken aback, Joyce responded that she thought it was just the way he is. She knew he was very physical in his engagement with others.
These kinds of actions continued over two years and, though Aaron was disconcerted with it at first, he got more and more comfortable with the touching. Over time, however, the amount of physical touch ramped up. Pastor Gene seemed to get more and more “touchy” with Aaron as he described it.
Then one day Pastor Gene leaned in to give Aaron a kiss.
Four months after Aaron shared his suspicions with Joyce, Pastor Gene’s wife, Lee came to him “and exposed everything.” She explained to him that she and her husband “had been having arguments since October.”
Aaron asked her, “What does that mean?”
“Lee shared how Pastor Gene had fallen in love with me.”
Aaron was shocked. He described putting “walls put up instantly.” He said he went home that night and his son, who was only over a year old, came to give him a kiss goodnight and Aaron said he “immediately put up a wall.”
Fortunately, he said he realized his mistake and “brought him in, giving him a kiss goodnight.”
Power of the Pastor’s Presence
According to Wanda Collins of Baylor University,
“Every clergy or minister is a symbol of religious authority. By virtue of the pastoral office, the minister interprets religious truth, the meaning of life, the way of faith, and even the reality of God. Add to that status the power of the pastor’s presence through ministry, and the special influence a minister holds among his or her congregation.”
As I have written before, there is a significant power diferential between pastors and their subordinates or congregant members. As Collins notes, people under their care look to them for guidance that involves eternal life. Sexual advances by a pastor to those under his care are called “harassment” for a reason. It is more than sex that is at play in these cases.
When the pastor’s wife met with Aaron, she said he “needed to go to the church board because she couldn’t.” She feared being the one to bring down her pastor husband.
Yet, by end of week she was telling Aaron, “I’m such a horrible person. I can’t believe I did this.” She had completely “flipped,” confusing Aaron and Joyce. Aaron said, “She told us that everything she had told us was wrong. She asked us to forget about it and forgive her. She said that it was an attack of the enemy on our church and Pastor.”
Aaron and Joyce began trying to prayerfully figure out what to do next. Pastor Gene and his wife were leaving on a vacation at the end of the week and so Aaron arranged a meeting with the four of them before they left.
Aaron described the meeting as a “laying out boundaries” he had determined to enforce. He told the pastor,
He would not be in a room alone with the pastor.
He would not allow the pastor to be with his son.
Aaron would not allow the pastor to touch him.
Their ministry work needed to be in view of others.
The pastor would not enter the prayer room where Aaron kept the music when Aaron was there.
Pastor Gene responded, “Are you calling me a pervert?”
As Aaron explained, this showed Pastor Gene’s hand.
Aaron said, “Nope, never did that. Just laying out boundaries.”
Sacred Trust
Collins notes, “When the male clergy exploits his privileged position for personal sexual satisfaction, he violates a sacred trust that is contrary to Christian morals, doctrine, and canon laws. Because of the respect and even reverence the position carries, there is an imbalance of power and hence a vulnerability inherent in the ministerial relationship.
That “sacred trust” was broken. Aaron knew he was in a very vulnerable position and Pastor Gene was not likely to humble himself. Staying meant further violations and leaving meant the loss of jobs and income.
However, Aaron and Joyce knew they needed to leave the church. Aaron explained to me four perspectives he had as they left:
Aaron said his attitude was, “If Christ forgave me, I have to forgive.”
Many survivors of abusive leadership will understandably struggle with forgiveness in part because they have been taught it means to ignore the sins of their abuser. However, Aaron recognized the need for accountability in leadership. He said that if nobody had come to leadership to report the pastor’s toxic behavior, he wanted to be first. But, if others had, Aaron wanted to corroborate the testimony of those others.
Though it was not their responsibility or burden to bear, Aaron and Joyce sought to leave the church quietly for fear of the sheep scattering. Aaron said he didn’t want it all to blow up and the congregation’s faith to be hurt.
And finally, Aaron said if Pastor Gene wanted help, Aaron was not the one who could give it, but could lead the pastor down that road.
Leaving the Abuse
When Aaron announced his resignation, he saw Pastor Gene begin to cover his tracks.
When Aaron and Joyce met with him a week before his last sunday in the employ of the church, Pastor Gene said, “My wife is Norwegian and I don’t know what I’m going to do with her.”
He blamed her for misreading his actions saying, “I’m a touchy kind of guy. I hug. She doesn’t understand that.”
As Aaron and Joyce left the employ of the church, he spoke with three trusted pastors: his father, Joyce’s uncle, and another local pastor named Troy.
He and Joyce went to her uncle and said they were trying to “get out fast.” The uncle asked why? Aaron said, “It’s just important to get out.”
Joyce’s uncle said, “Is there an issue with pastor?”
Finally Aaron said, “Yeah.”
“Joyce’s Uncle asked her if we were leaving because Pastor was having an affair. Joyce did not respond. He asked if it was with a man. She was shocked and began to cry. Being that they already knew part of the situation, we relayed the whole story to them. They both said they were not surprised.”
The uncle shared about other pastors who had left shortly after working for Pastor Gene. He also spoke of rumors regarding Pastor Gene exhibiting homosexual behavior.
The uncle even described a night “when he got a call and the caller was inappropriate and he thought it sounded like Pastor Gene.”
Up to this point, Aaron and Joyce thought this was an isolated incident. However, the uncle’s comments added to the pastor’s wife’s revelation that it had happened before.
Joyce’s Uncle encouraged them to tell someone what was going on, but Aaron said they felt insecure, embarrassed, and confused.
However, Aaron and Joyce went to Aaron’s father, also a pastor. Aaron explained that his denomination is very concerned about slander and if Aaron accused Pastor Gene of anything, things would not go well for him. His father’s advice was helpful to Aaron. He told Aaron, “Don’t accuse, just share your story when reporting it.”
Blood on His Head
Pastor Troy came to Aaron and asked him why he was leaving the ministry. Again, Aaron tried to hide the true reason, but the pastor kept pushing him.
Aaron asked Pastor Troy, “Why are you pushing?” He replied, “Because I think I know why.” Aaron asked him what he knew and again the pastor said he had heard rumors. The pastor said, “I should have done something about it [when I heard the rumors]. I didn’t, so your blood is on my head. I’m not going to let that happen again.”
As they left the church quietly, they faced the anger and disappointment of family members who didn’t understand their move. How could they leave the church “in a lurch like this,” they asked.
Joyce’s mom shared her suspicions that the pastor had an affair, thinking he was involved in a sexual relationship with a woman. They explained Pastor Gene’s sexual advances. Obviously, it was not an affair as that would imply consent and willing emotional and/or sexual involvement between two adults.
Neither of which applies in Aaron’s case where Pastor Gene groomed and attempted to sexually assault him.
Her father told them they needed to tell others or “Pastor Gene will see it as weakness and he’ll do this same thing again.”
Reporting
After several months, having resigned, Aaron typed up his story and had it notarized. He made two copies “so it wouldn’t be forgotten.” He set up a meeting with the regional leadership of the denomination and read it to them.
Joyce’s father went with them to the meeting along with the other pastor to whom Aaron had shared the story.
The other pastor told Aaron he wanted to tell his own story and not have Aaron in the meeting when he did. He wanted to tell his story seperately from Aaron so the evidence would be presented in an “unbiased way.”
After nearly a year and a half, Aaron and Joyce had heard nothing. The other pastor began pushing the regional leadership to do something.
The leadership called Aaron about meeting with Pastor Gene because the pastor wanted to apologize to him. Aaron agreed to recieving a letter from Pastor Gene, but not a personal visit.
Pastor Gene wrote the letter and it was like so many apologies of abusers. Aaron described it as saying, “I’m sorry you feel badly that I did this to you.” Aaron said there was no actual apology.
The leadership asked Aaron what they should do about Pastor Gene. Aaron shared with them that it was their responsibility to hold him accountable, not Aaron’s.
Accountability
When I asked Aaron what has provided the most healing for him, he said he sought perspective on his ministry. Aaron said, “My dad is a pastor. My gramps is pastor. I have experience knowing that even though people are in the church, they are still people.”
Aaron went on,
“My relationship with God is not dependent on people. It’s got to be my relationship with the Lord . . . We often put people on pedestal because they are in leadership. We honor those people God has given us, but we must primarily honor the Lord. I can’t look to leaders to build my relationship with the Lord. . . Jacob wrestled with god, there is a wrestling we have to have with the Lord to grow.”
Aaron made much of building good and solid boundaries.
Though abuse is never the result of the victim’s sin, but rather the deeply rooted sin in the heart of the abuser, Aaron sought to be humble before the Lord and consider how he could grow, knowing he couldn’t fix Pastor Gene’s heart.
Beauty from Ashes
In parting, Aaron shared that he saw the sovereignty of God in bringing beauty from the ashes of the evil Pastor Gene perpetrated. Though he lost his “dream” job, he was given a beautiful mnistry planting a church, ministering alongside his wife to other broken people.
“He works all things together for our good. I have to believe that and I have seen God’s hand in that.”
Editor's Note: This was largely written by a friend who has taken a keen interest in toxic leadership having been under it and suffered the consequences of being a whistleblower.
Today we live in a time when even Christians seem quite oblivious to folly.
Sometimes things follow the path of the second half of Romans, where, “folly continues until it become obvious to all.” God brings this about.
We look for strong leaders using the world’s standards of leadership . . . not God’s.
Elders in Christ’s church are called to serve; this is how they are to lead. Jesus served. And He came to die. And His last act before the cross was washing His disciples feet, as an example for them to see and follow, themselves.
Is He Successful?
But rather than look at a life of service, we ask, “Is the man successful?”
He has to “have a good reputation” in the world. So many today strive for glory – vain glory, their own glory, that comes from self-serving ambition in order to have a reputation as a leader, in turn building a large following.
I remember sitting at lunch at a regional denominational meeting as several pastors were discussing what they did in “their churches.” One after another said “In my church, we do this”as they discusses the things that they had initiated in their church. They said, “In my church, this is how we do it . . . under my leadership.
They didn’t talk in the sense that “this is my church” in the way I speak of the church I joined in my area.
I use “my” to speak of the church I belong to, not the churchI own. Often pastors, like these, talk about “my” church as though it is theirs, not God’s.
The Shepherd
The word “pastor,” which is a latin word, has an entirely different meaning than the word in the Greek translated into English. “Shepherd,” the word used in Scripture, doesn’t mean much in American life; we don’t see shepherds and don’t understand the position the shepherd held in biblical times.
The Strongs Dictionary says,
“The tasks of a Near Eastern shepherd were: 1. to watch for enemies trying to attack the sheep, 2. to defend the sheep from attackers, 3. to heal the wounded and sick sheep, 4. to find and save lost or trapped sheep, and 5. to love them, sharing their lives and so earning their trust.”
Strongs Enhanced Dictionary
We don’t really understand shepherd well, having rarely if ever seen actual shepherds in our churches.
Many who seek fame, rather than service, have their reward in this life. This is the intent of Jesus’ repetition of “Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward” that is found in His “Sermon on the Mount.” If you are seeking the attention of man, you may get that attention.
A large church. Important book contract. Seminar bookings.
But, those rewards will end with this life and Jesus says you will not receive true heavenly rewards.
Paul spoke of those who work for selfish gain. Many will find themselves in the position Paul describes in I Corinthians 3:
Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work.
1 Corinthians 3:12-13
Responsibility, Not Authority
Maybe we could begin to shift our focus by concentrating on the “responsibility” of shepherding people rather than having “authority” when considering the position of Pastor in the local church.
A true shepherd, as Jesus describes, does not run from danger, but seeks to protect the flock under his charge (John 10). The sheep love their shepherd because he cares for them. He does not crush or take advantage.
He is all those wonderful qualities described in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-16.
The sheep do not fear him.
You may be surprised that Jesus never suggests that church leaders grab authority or exercise it. He continually challenges leaders to be humble. To wash feet. To love others.
Not take authority.
Pride has the tendency to supplant humility and it takes humility to serve others in love, the calling of all followers of Jesus.
And this is especially the responsibility of the shepherds of God’s people.
There is often a significant difference between the short-term and the long-term.
We see our oppressors (as the Bible calls them) winning the battle. Their violence goes unpunished. Their manipulation continues to create more supporters and greater isolation.
They arrogantly assume they have the upper hand. And in the short-term, they do.
Church leadership says, “It’s her story against his.”
Business leadership says, “He just doesn’t buy into our vision.”
The organization’s board says, “He is tough, but he gets the job done.”
None of them realize the damage that is being done. And the abuser continues to win the day.
So said Asaph in Psalm 73. The song writer gives a 3000 year old account of the sufferings of those under abuse in the home, workplace, and organization. He is frustrated by the evil he sees and the seeming hopelessness he finds to be his daily existence.
For I was envious of the arrogant when I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For they have no pangs until death; their bodies are fat and sleek. They are not in trouble as others are; they are not stricken like the rest of mankind. Therefore pride is their necklace; violence covers them as a garment. Their eyes swell out through fatness; their hearts overflow with follies. They scoff and speak with malice; loftily they threaten oppression. They set their mouths against the heavens, and their tongue struts through the earth. Therefore his people turn back to them, and find no fault in them.
Psalm 73:3-10
But Asaph, like so many survivors of abuse, came to a place when clarity swept him up into the heavenlies.
Asaph sings,
But when I thought how to understand this, it seemed to me a wearisome task, until I went into the sanctuary of God; then I discerned their end. Truly you set them in slippery places; you make them fall to ruin. How they are destroyed in a moment, swept away utterly by terrors! Like a dream when one awakes, O Lord, when you rouse yourself, you despise them as phantoms.
Nevertheless, I am continually with you; you hold my right hand. You guide me with your counsel, and afterward you will receive me to glory. Whom have I in heaven but you? And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you. My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.
But for me it is good to be near God; I have made the Lord GOD my refuge, that I may tell of all your works.
Psalm 73:17-20, 23-26, 28
Asaph entered the sanctuary. We may have that moment in a worship service, or mountain hike, or moment of quiet meditation.
It is in that moment that the long-term saves us from the short-term.
No matter what others say. No matter the attitude of a pastor, elder, or CEO. No matter the short-sighted thinking of a board president. No matter a friend’s ignorance.
The LORD is with the oppressed. He is not with the abuser. They are destroyed in a moment.
The LORD is my strength. No opinion of man. No pride of position.
The LORD is my Refuge.
Do you need some help and encouragement? Go to our Resources page.
A friend of Jada’s first used the word “oppression” to describe abuse in 2021. It just blew her mind. Jada said, “God has much to say to survivors of abuse about oppression in the Bible.”
Jada continued,
“Although God talks about oppression throughout scripture, in all churches I’ve attended, leaders only refer to oppression as spiritual oppression or the slavery Israelites endured under Pharaoh. How many survivors of abuse would benefit from knowing that God directly addresses what they have been through in the Bible when he condemns oppression in scripture?”
It is such a great word to describe what she experienced. Jada said she “felt like a prisoner set free” when she left her abusive pastor.
The Power He Wielded
Jada was in college when she came to know and love Jesus Christ. She was on fire for the Lord and got connected to a small house church.
As a new Christian, she described herself as “completely open to the things of God and eager to be taught. Hungry for personal discipleship.” She was the type of convert every evangelist seeks to make.
Pastor Martin, the leader of the house church, was at first very helpful. He became like a father figure to her. Her family had rejected her when she became a Christian, and he gave her extensive spiritual counsel.
He told her how special she was. Pastor Martin said she was submissive and dedicated. He described these attributes as critical markers of spiritual growth and true conversion. She was different from the other church members who left. Those people he described as “prideful.” In his eyes, they weren’t genuine Christians, and he frequently disparaged them.
Pastor Martin said he had a gift of discernment. According to him, “He could hear from God and discern hearts,” she recalled. Jada felt blessed to have someone like that protecting her at the time. “He could, with one look, know someone’s spiritual state.” So Jada felt encouraged when he looked upon her with favor and singled her out from the small crowd.
On the other hand, there was a power he wielded that was concerning.
“Everyone was given a label with a secret sin . . . and we would often hear lengthy messages about these dangerous sins from the pulpit,”
Jada explained that in such a small church when he spoke of a specific sin from the pulpit, everyone knew to whom he was referring.
“I would sit nervously in my chair while he preached on and on, hoping he wouldn’t share from the pulpit the sins I had confessed to him privately earlier that week.”
In addition, Pastor Martin would question her often about her romantic relationships, telling her to “dump a boyfriend and not to date anyone.” He would ask her intrusive questions about how she may have sinned sexually with her past boyfriends.
“I was scared to not divulge everything because, according to him, he could read me like a book. Using discretion about my past sins was treated like immaturity. He would say that mature Christians could handle a topic about sexual sin.”
So Jada thought of it as helping her grow in spiritual maturity. She felt she needed a lot of godly guidance. Jada wanted to date and get married, but he taught her it was wrong to have those desires. He equated those desires to the sin of lust and being unfocused on the things of God.
After a couple years of this, she said she was molded into the type of follower her pastor wanted her to be. She was submissive to him and conditioned not to challenge his directions.
Being Isolated
Pastor Martin was independent of any ecclesiastical authority . . . there was no denominational headquarters or church hierarchy above him.
In fact, there was a clear impression that he gave that if you followed him, you followed God. Of course, the opposite was true as well – if you didn’t follow him and left the church, you followed Satan.
As people left the church they didn’t coherently explain why they were going. Pastor Martin, however, considered them dangerous. Maybe, he explained, they practiced witchcraft or were “religious.” “Religious” to the Pastor was negatively applied to those with strong convictions. He called them “demonic.” They were missing what good God had planned for them.
Jada explained why she avoided communicating with those who left.
“I was warned not to talk and spend time with those who left. I could risk getting infected with whatever spiritual stronghold they had. Engaging with those who left was scary. I didn’t want to follow the enemy.”
And engaging with the quitters would make Pastor Martin very upset with her. He effectively isolated her.
In His Employ
Then he employed her with his personal business.
It provided a source of financial stability. However, Jada didn’t feel like it was an actual choice. “The job was presented as something God was giving me so I was expected to take it.” She explained to me she wouldn’t have taken the job if actually been offered it.
But she was compliant.
He was “increasingly controlling, demanding, demeaning, volatile and generally unpredictable.”
Jada said, “One minute, he would be domineering, large, and in charge, especially in public. But in private, he would become kind to me, but inappropriate and without professional boundaries as well.” He told Jada she was his “best friend” and the only person he could confide in.
Except he was married.
Boundaries
Pastor Martin’s temper was unpredictable. Jada was under the impression that she was often the cause of his upset mood, which was a massive weight on her. Surely God didn’t want her upsetting her so-called “spiritual covering.”
Any kind of error at work or if she had a theological difference or friendship he didn’t approve of could bring about an inquisition.
In disagreement, he called Jada “mentally unstable.” But as long as they agreed, she was considered sane, even intelligent, and especially “spiritual.”
Over the years Pastor Martin broke down boundary after boundary.
He arranged to carpool alone with her. He came to her apartment any time he wanted. Over time, he borrowed thousands of dollars for business deals he convinced her God gave him. Jada always agreed with great reluctance and fear of upsetting him.
She put on a happy face, but she dreaded him telling her she had to give away yet another piece of the little independence she had left. To her dismay, he continued to enmesh himself in her daily life.
“My whole world revolved around ministry, my pastor’s business, and attempting to control his temper toward me. He enmeshed himself in my life. Then, my pastor began flirting with me. I didn’t know how to react. Maybe I’m misinterpreting his behavior. I must’ve imagined that.”
Flirting or Just Being Friendly?
Even though the pastor’s flirtations were confusing and uncomfortable, compared to his hot temper and insults, his strange flirtatious behavior felt like a relief.
She had been taught that he was supposed to be her “spiritual covering of safety.” But, the intrusive sexual questions and flirtations toward her intensified. The pastor often discussed his marital problems with her. Then he explained to her that he had discerned they were in love and shouldn’t fight their “destiny.”
She felt dizzy.
That same day, she tried to avoid being alone with him, but couldn’t shake him and he followed her into her apartment. She didn’t want to be impolite.
He then sexually assaulted her.
Her response was typical for trauma victims. Many will fight, some will flee, and some will appease. Jada did what she always did when his behaviors were inappropriate – she didn’t question, didn’t talk back, she submitted. She went along in order to be safe.
Once the overt sexual abuse began, she was in a daze. She was confused. Was it a generational curse because of her family background? Was she lusting?
Pastor Martin’s claims about being in love seemed believable because of her apparent loyalty to him over the years.
His sexual contact with her didn’t make sense but he had a way of spiritually explaining away the behavior. He implied that she didn’t leave like the others because she was in love with him and God put them together.
One of the most disgusting lies he told her was that she “was a whore” and the only way to keep her supposed lustful tendencies in control and not affect other men was to comply with his sexual behavior.
She said, “It’s many years since the abuse happened and even now, when I am in the presence of a man, I am scared that I might tempt him to want me sexually because this is what the pastor said I always did to him.”
Bringing it to Light
“I felt like I actually was going crazy. Pastor Martin’s manipulation was so effective. I felt I couldn’t trust my thoughts. I felt caged. This was my lot in life. He said God was in control of this. If I told, he said people wouldn’t understand. I would be called a Jezebel.”
And besides, how could she accuse a man who had poured so much into her life? She asked herself, “Isn’t rebuking an elder wrong?”
She felt that the Gospel ministry would be ruined if she spoke up. “My silence meant that the gospel work would continue.”
Jada discovered a painful reality. If a victim of “grooming” speaks out before there is sexual contact with a church leader, they are often accused of reading into his actions.
But, if she speaks up after sexual assault has happened then she is accused of being complicit.
As Jada recalled the experience she said,
“I’ve watched this happen to other survivors. They speak up about concerning behavior and the pastor accuses them of slander. People often believe the narrative of the abuser. Others speak up after the sexual abuse occurs and they get called a seductress. Survivors are often vilified no matter how they respond. No one wants to believe the pastor is actually a predator. The victim is deemed expendable because they think the reputation of the ministry and pastor is not.”
Horrendous Evil
Pastor Martin further entangled himself into Jada’s life. He convinced Jada to give him spare car keys and a house key to keep business files in her apartment.
Jada eventually developed agoraphobia. When she would leave her home, she would feel dizzy and have panic attacks. Perhaps someone would recognize her from being with the pastor and could discern what was happening. She said it lasted for years after the abuse and only subsided when she had safety in a good and godly marriage.
Jada explained, “It breaks my heart reflecting on the pastor’s incredible abuse of power in teaching me to forgo marriage and children for so long while he abused me. It’s horrendously evil.”
There were other effects of the abuse that Jada experiences even today.
Recurring nightmares have been a continual thorn in the flesh for Jada. Those nightmares, a common symptom of PTSD, have been about “trying to escape the abuse again or the abuser coming back” to get her.
When Jada was working with the pastor, she portrayed a persona to cope. She explained, “It was like an alter ego and outsiders came to know me as this person. I was a person who was strong and decisive though inside I felt like I was dying.” When she broke free of his oppression, like other abuse survivors, she felt she was unable to make a decision for herself.
“In reality, I never learned how to make my own decisions. Every choice I made was filtered through the question, ‘Will my pastor agree or will this make him upset?’”
When Jada was finally able to disclose the abuse to a pastor from another church, he helped her to understand that she was free from having her decisions made for her. Jada said she was awakened to the idea that “everyone else in my age group had become adults in charge of their own lives and here I was like a child who never grew up because I lived under oppression for so long.”
After she disclosed the abuse and the pastor decided to leave the ministry, Jada was finally able to be herself. A friend told her she had changed in that she was actually “fun.” Prior to that, she didn’t really have friends. She only had coworkers in ministry. Jada explained,
“I could never truly get close with anyone without the pastor eventually telling me that person was spiritually dangerous and I shouldn’t be around them.'”
It grieves her that she lost those years of emotional and spiritual growth.
All the Abuse
Jada described the various abuses she suffered. She said,
“Spiritual abuse and clergy sexual abuse go hand in hand. Much of what I experienced I read about later in literature about cults who twist Scripture to justify abusive behavior and demonize those who dissent.”
Pastor Martin told her she was “destined by God to be by his side” and that God showed him that she was “in love with him.”
She experienced gaslighting where he manipulated her to the point she questioned her own sanity. Jada felt she couldn’t rely on her own memory. She had to rely on him.
There was emotional abuse. Pastor Martin would blow up at unpredictable times, keeping her always hypervigilant. He humiliated her publicly and then privately call her “delusional and a ‘whore.'” A couple times, he tapped her face “with an open hand like he was slapping” her, and told her to shut up.
Jada explained,
“Adult clergy sexual abuse isn’t merely about the spiritual leader sinning sexually and violating the victim’s body. The wound that is inflicted upon the victim is a deep spiritual wound to their personhood.”
The damage all this abuse does to a person is not only emotional and spiritual. The physical effects of abuse are well documented even when a hand is not laid upon the victim. In essence, all abuse is physical. It causes trauma.
There is “actual damage to the brain. It’s traumatic.”
And yet, “many people expect survivors of adult clergy sexual abuse to simply move on, because they wrongly classify the abuse as a consensual act of sexual immorality.”
In those cases, such as adultery or fornication, confession and forgiveness can be given and received through Jesus’s work on the cross. However, clergy sexual abuse, causes trauma . . . while sexual immorality does not. Sexual abuse, particularly from one with spiritual “authority” is deeply damaging and not the fault of the victim.
It is for this reason that many states have enacted laws making it illegal for spiritual authorities to have sexual contact with those under their care. [see this website for a list]
The spiritual effects of this kind of abuse are deeply distressing. Jada explained,
“When you’ve been so deeply and repeatedly harmed by the church, it’s natural to conclude, ‘I was abused by a pastor, therefore all pastors are bad and none can be trusted’ or ‘my church was bad therefore all churches are bad.’”
I have spoken with multiple victims of spiritual and sexual abuse who have either refused to attend church or given up entirely on Christianity. The church has become an unsafe and triggering place for these victims.
Unfortunately, many congregant members fail to understand the underlying causes and are impatient with survivors. They fail to see the many cries of the Psalmists as they struggled with their faith in the midst of abuse (Psalm 10, 88).
Vindication
When I asked Jada about the need for vindication, she said,
“Realistically, it never fully happens. Even in situations where there is a third-party investigation and it is made clear to the public that the pastor committed adult clergy sexual abuse, some people will still deny the claims. They choose to go along with the abuser’s narrative – that it was consensual and that he should return to ministry. Survivors who think healing will come from being vindicated often discover that the path to healing can happen with or without vindication. That’s good because so often, vindication isn’t fully attainable.”
I have written of the helpfulness of vindication elsewhere. However, Jada provided a helpful balance.
She noted that if looking to receive vindication from others, it is not only disappointing when they do not come alongside, it can also be retraumatizing when they don’t.
“When heard and affirmed, it is so healing.” But, when she was victim shamed she felt like she was facing a Salem witch trial. She continued, “It truly hurt worse than the abuse.”
Healing
Jada is free, but the healing takes time.
Jada described a life that has been changed. She has seen healing that’s slow but continually taking place. She said,
“The life I have now was unfathomable to me during the abuse. During the abuse, I could not picture myself as an adult in charge of my own life. Now I am.”
Part of her healing process included dealing with unwanted flashbacks of the victim shaming.
Things were going great in her life and she couldn’t understand why she would be still experiencing the shame in flashbacks. At the advice of a Christian counselor, she spent significant time journaling and seeking the Lord.
Eventually, she found relief from the flashbacks after coming to terms with the fact that she would never be able to convince those who shamed her that what happened was abuse. She came to terms with this reality and was able to move on. Thankfully, the flashbacks of victim shaming are no longer an issue.
Jada emphasized to me that the way to healing for every survivor is different and encourages survivors to seek help in healing in a variety of ways, including professional therapy.
Healing is a process, especially because trauma shows up in bodily reactions. If someone says something triggering or insensitive about abuse survivors, she can experience stomach cramping and other illnesses, sometimes for days. It can also result in vomitting.
One of the great difficulties of healing from abuse trauma is facing the losses that were experienced under the abuse. One woman has told me how much she grieves the loss of her self-esteem and the skills she had before being entrapped in an abusive marriage. Jada said, “I see how it stripped me of my identity – both who I was as a person (what I liked, what I didn’t like), and who God made me to be in Christ.”
Jada explained that when she converted, her identity in Christ was not encouraged.
“The focus was more on becoming like the leader, the pastor, rather than becoming like the Christ of the Bible. I felt like the identity I was given was ‘young, single, Christian woman, [and a] threat to men’s spirituality.’”
Part of her healing has been to truly believe that these things were not her fundamental identity, She was not a “threat to men’s spirituality” and she actually “deserved to be treated with authentic Christ-like pastoral care.” The idea that she was not inherently lustful and did not deserve to be exploited was “revolutionary” to her.
It is Not an Affair . . . or a Relationship
When asked what truths in God’s Word have been most helpful to her healing, she shared,
“The pastor who abused me told me that I had a permanent lust problem that was inherited generationally and this is why the sexual contact was occurring. But this was a twisted lie. 2 Corinthians 5:17 says, ‘If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.’ I have been made new! I’m not cursed with some lust problem that could only be curbed by sexual contact with this man.
The pastor would constantly condemn me by using my confessions of past sin to say that this is who I inherently was. But Romans 8 teaches that I am free from condemnation (Rom. 8:1-2) and free from any condemning charges against me (Rom. 8:31-34). I wasn’t condemned to a life of satisfying this man’s sinful desires. Ephesians 2:10 says, ‘For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.’ I was created to do good works, not do good works while living with a secret that was killing me. Now I can finally live the life I wanted to back then – a life of freedom to serve God without oppression.”
Jada refuses to lose hope that church leaders will become educated about clergy sexual abuse of adults. She said they should listen to the stories of those who have experienced it and read the research.
As the title of this blog says, clergy sexual abuse is not an “affair.” It is not a relationship. It is a person with significant power overcoming one who is under their care.
It is rape.
When a person looks back on a consensual relationship that was broken, Jada said,
“They don’t look back on the relationship in horror. If there is no abuse, they won’t suffer with recurring nightmares and other PTSD symptoms. This is why adult clergy sexual abuse isn’t an illicit affair. It’s nonconsensual and it’s abuse. It causes trauma.”
Many people do not understand the power that someone with spiritual authority has. That authority removes consensuality from the equation. Consent can’t be given in cases where someone is “over the other” in a spiritual way. In those cases, “there is a dynamic that they can’t freely say no.”
The ability of a pastor to gaslight and manipulate through scripture is particularly heinous – using God’s Word, that was intended for shalom and well-being, to tear down the image of God and agency in another.
Helping
Jada said that those who treat victims of clergy sexual abuse as adulterers
“may find themselves inadvertently repeating the same messages that the abuser planted in the survivor’s mind – that she was complicit and that it was her sensuality that caused him to sin. When people victim shame and blame, they reinforce the same weapon of lies that the abuser used.”
If you wish to help a survivor, you need to be careful with your words. Well-meaning helpers make comments that shame and blame:
“Well, you shouldn’t have been alone with the pastor. You should know that he would be tempted by you.”
“Yeah, she has a past, so hearing about her and the pastor doesn’t surprise me.”
Because shame affects people emotionally and physically, and therefore creates pain and discomfort, Jada said many survivors will hide. They will use anonymous names on social media so they won’t be targeted and retraumatized by victim shamers.
Survivors often choose to keep a part of their life hidden from others for fear of being shamed. They are not able to fully live “in the freedom Christ has given them.”
Survivors need safe people who will hear their story. The telling of the story is an important first, second, and third step to healing. Trauma does not go away without intentional disclosure. But trauma can also be intensified when the story is dismissed or met with disbelief.
Once during therapy, Jada’s therapist said, “You are so brave.” Jada noted that some survivors of abuse don’t like that. However, it was empowering to her.
Jada says,
“In most of my dreams now, I actually tell the abuser that I’m not captive by him anymore. So, those dreams aren’t scary. Even in my dreams, I’m stronger. I’ve grown. I’m a different person now.”
I so appreciated Jada (not her real name) sharing her story. She helped me extensively in the writing of it. Jada is a gracious and godly woman who deserved so much more than what the church gave her. Yet, she continues to serve God’s people. Thank you for sharing, Jada.
