Category Archives: Forgiveness

Jim & Mary: Pastoral Abuse Part 2

Posted on by
1

This is the second part in a series on the experience of Jim and Mary [not their real names] as they navigated the stormy seas of pastoral abuse. Jim was hired as a youth pastor in a medium-size Midwestern church. The youth program grew significantly, but the pastor, who was also newly hired, continually sought to discredit and discourage Jim’s ministry. See Part One before reading this.

Near the end of three years, the Pastor Carl preached a message on Psalm 34. Jim said,

“He preached on how the wicked person would soon be removed! It was clearly targeted at me.”

Jim said after preaching the sermon, Pastor Carl just walked out of pulpit and “left the church angry.”

By this time, there were over 100 students attending youth group on Wednesday evenings. Jim had made the church youth center available to the kids after school until youth group began in the evening. Many did not have good homes to go home to.

One church Deacon, who was a farmer and very “insurance-minded,” expressed worry that a “majority of the students were non-white…new to church.” Pastor Carl told him, “We’re going to get sued” if one of the kids knives someone.

It became policy that youth were not allowed in the church between school dismissal and 5:30 p.m.

And then they appointed Jim to stand guard outside the building and force kids to leave the property.

“The church was their only place to go besides the parking lot of a nearby McDonalds or a row of abandoned storefronts next to the church.” Jim said the after-school ministry went “from three adults supervising 30 students to nothing.”

Finally, Pastor Carl gave the church leadership an ultimatum: if Jim does not go, he would. Jim was offered a severance package to leave but he felt he needed to defend himself so did not resign.

One day Jim was standing outside the church and thought to himself, “This is getting nastier and nastier each time. If I go to youth camp and a student makes a bad decision, it is going to be on my neck.” He felt that at that point Pastor Carl would use anything possible against him.

He finally had complete peace about leaving. Jim went to a deacon that had been ill (like Jim) because of all the conflict and asked him, “Are you okay with giving me a severance?” Jim had three children and was living in a parsonage so would lose everything when he left.

Loss

The day Jim left the church was his hardest day of ministry.

On that Sunday, lots of students were there. It was announced that morning that he was resigning.

The pastor was trying to control the situation – he asked visitors to leave before he announced Jim’s resignation. Jim said, “[Pastor Carl] was excited, shaking hands, smiling.” But the “energy was sucked out of the room” when he made the announcement.

Jim described the horror and loss:

“The majority of the church didn’t have a clue. Everyone was crying in youth group. During the worship one of the members of a church council came to me and said he could fight it. He said, ‘Will you let us fight for you?’ But I had peace about leaving…It was going to be framed as youth pastor against pastor – it was the youth pastor who was insubordinate and angry at the pastor.”

Jim felt he needed to move on so the church could deal with Pastor Carl.

Take Aways

As I heard Jim and Mary’s story, I continually recognized elements in their own story that related to the stories of so many others I have interviewed. There can be comfort in knowing that what you are going through is not new under the sun.

Like those who face spousal abuse, men and women caught in toxic ministry and organizational settings can begin to think they are crazy or their situation is unique and they must just live with it.

But our situations are not unique and below are identifying toxic leadership similarities that stand out in Jim and Mary’s story.

Demanded Authority

It is common in toxic work environments that leadership is authoritarian.

Many people want to follow a “strong” leader. They want someone who will go before, make decisions decisively, and give vision to the ministry.

Jean Lipma-Blumen, author of “The Allure of Toxic Leaders,” said,

“When our freedom unnerves us, we tend to gravitate toward any leader who will make us feel safe, protected, and good about ourselves. Toxic leaders, who promise security and assure us that we are special or ‘chosen,’ become particularly powerful magnets for our unmoored egos.”1

The difficulty is that these kinds of leaders will frequently run rough-shod over the gifts and skills of those under his or her authority. He will tend to make all the decisions. And he will tend to expect others to toe the line.

He will demand authority rather than seek to earn the respect and submission of his subordinates.

We shoudl be suspicious when we hear individuals talk about someone being a “strong” leader. They may indeed be strong in the right ways:

  • Helping subordinates use their gifts, encouraging them to grow in their skills.
  • Sharing authority with those who have leadership potential.
  • Giving voice to those who may disagree with his own views and vision.

But it is all too frequent that they are simply authoritarian…and destructive to the organization, her employees, and its witness to Christ’s love.

Isolating

Domestic abuse is often marked by an abuser who isolates his target.

In like ways, a toxic boss pockets his target’s fellow workers by schmoozing and seeming to be the reasonable one. I have seen multiple abusive husbands become very chummy with their pastor. One even lived in the basement of his pastor’s home for several months. I have observed abusive husbands win over his target’s family leaving her estranged from them.

In doing so, they then enlistist the aid of those whom they have pocketed to stand up for them and spy for them. The target is traumatized even more by well-meaning people who do not understand or identify abuse, but only want to “help the relationship be reconciled.“

In the case of Jim and Mary, Pastor Carl had much of the congregation bamboozeled by his “strong leadership” and sought the aid of the babysitters and chaperone in spying out the lay of the land in order to control Jim.

Another common isolation tactic is for the toxic leader to suggest that “everyone” is against you. Pastor Carl drew on this age-old tool with Jim and Mary arguing that nobody thought he was doing a good job.

Do not be bamboozeled!

One-Ups-Manship

Narcissism is not necessarily part of being an abusive leader, but often is a driving force. Those who are narcissistic in their personality will do everything in their power to keep on top of their subordinates. Jim said,

Pastor Carl was continually spiritually troubled! He was obsessively trying to control his image. Always trying to control perception of the church in the community. Not concerned with evangelism as much as recruiting influential people.

If the subordinate is doing well, he must do better. If the subordinate comes up with a good idea, he must either squash it or take credit for it. Jim said whenever he had success it would “result in a blowup in the office or attempt to get me out.“

The goal of the abusive leader is to be the “big man.” And he will do whatever is in his power to gain and hold that power.

Unfortunately, Jim and Mary learned the hard way.

God Bless the Oppressed

Jim’s understanding of ministry was formed through the poor leadership of Pastor Carl. As we talked he led me to Ephesians 5 where he said scripture gives direction for the “balanced” ministry.

He noted that the pastor is not called to be a CEO or “bully,” but to

  • Feed the sheep [training]
  • Lead the sheep [define direction for church]
  • and Care for the sheep [pastoral care]

He said this “undermines” the CEO view of church leadership.

In the end, Jim realized that Proverbs 19:19 spoke directly to their situation.

A man of great wrath will pay the penalty,
for if you deliver him, you will only have to do it again.

He realized that he had rescued Pastor Carl many times by staying and by leaving the church, “[Pastor Carl] was exposed and it gave him the rope to hang himself.” The pastor left the church a few months later under a cloud.

Forgiveness

It was a long time for Jim to forgive, but he considered it an absolute necessity.

Jim said he needed to “release the things that [Pastor Carl] did that messed” with their lives. Though he noted, forgiving others is not necessary for salvation for the Christian, it is a need and a command.

He said he had experienced forgiveness from the Lord and therefore, like the servant in Matthew 18, he needed to turn around and forgive others.

But it was not a once and done deal. He realized it would take time and the old feelings of anger would resurface. Talking about the situation with others helped in that healing process.

A woman who ministered to children in a Native boarding school nearby shared with Jim while he was in the midst of the battle. The woman’s husband abused her and she understood Jim’s situation.

She gave Jim a book that was a parable on Saul and David’s relationship. Saul and David’s relationship now makes sense to Jim after this experience. The toxic environment Saul created illumines Jim’s understanding of his own life under Pastor Carl.

Jim ended our discussion by saying, “Forgiveness is the most healing thing.”

Do you have a story of abusive leadership? Please contact Pearls And Swine Site so that others may gain from your experience and wisdom learned.

NOTES:

  1. Lipman-Blumen, Jean. The Allure of Toxic Leaders: Why We Follow Destructive Bosses and Corrupt Politicians–and How We Can Survive Them (p. 35). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition. ↩︎

Jim & Mary: Pastoral Abuse Part 1

Posted on by
2

Jim was contacted to apply for a position as Youth Director at a medium-size church in the Midwest. He and Mary, his wife, were excited. They were moving out in ministry. Jim had been praying for more opportunity to reach into the community with the Gospel.

The position appeared to be a God-given break.

This is Their Story

At the same time one committee was hiring Jim, another committee at the church was hiring the new pastor, Carl. A lot of change for the church. Jim had a vision for the ministry and was ready to tackle the new position with gusto.

He looked forward to working with the pastor who came on a month after he did. Jim believed he could get along with anyone, particularly, he told himself, someone “who was a spiritual leader.“

But it was not long for the trouble to begin.

Big Plans

The church was realing from its former pastor’s leadership.

But they were moving forward. The pastoral search committee was headed up by a strong leader, and his vision for a pastor who would lead and teach with authority held sway over the other members.

He wanted a pastor that would “command authority.” A sort of “CEO style” of leadership, Jim said.

Jim shared that the initial conversations with the pastor were a little “awkward.” Jim “expressed enthusiasm,” but did not get much “positive feedback” from Pastor Carl.

After a short time, Jim suggested instituting weekly staff meetings, something that had been very helpful to him for planning in the church he had recently served. It was welcomed by the staff, but he noticed that when they talked about the youth ministry and any difficulties he was having Pastor Carl was taking copious notes.

Approximately five months later, the personnel committee called Jim to a special meeting. He figured it was a “job evaluation” kind of meeting. Everyone on the committee was upbeat when Jim arrived except the chairman…the same chairman from the pastoral search committee.

When the meeting began the chairman opened a file folder of notes that the pastor had taken during the staff meetings.

He began to systematically go through the notes and one-by-one turn it into an “indictment of [Jim’s] character.”

After the meeting several of the members came up to Jim and said, “I don’t know what that was about. I think you are doing a good job. I am going to find out what is going on.”

It seemed to end there however. Nothing more was said and ministry went on.

They Will Come

There was a new facility for the youth that was not really being used.

It kind of a harkened back to the “if you build it they will come” idea. One of the church leaders asked him cynically early on, “Will we ever fill this place?“

Jim looked forward to the day they would fill it with youth and began reaching into the Native American community that had been largely ignored in the past by the church. After three years of faithful ministry, God was beginning to fill the building. They had gone from just a few teens attending mid-week youth meetings to over 100, many of whom were from the Native community.

But of course, every cloud with a silver lining also dumps a boatload of rain.

In the midst of this excitement, Jim was driving home one night from a youth meeting and received a call to come back to the church for a meeting. He still had his basketball clothes on and was sweaty. When he arrived it was evident to him that the meeting had been planned for sometime, though he was not told until he would have no choice but to walk in late.

In attendance were Pastor Carl and a few Deacons who were favorable to the pastor’s views. The pastor proceeded to make statement after statement that implied Jim was doing a poor job and that “nobody liked” what he was doing.

The youth leaders were “very upset so they banded together in a Wednesday night prayer meeting and brought it to the surface. They didn’t understand why there was relational conflict.” Jim said, “People would come up and ask ‘why do you have such a hard time with the pastor.’ Like I had a personal grievence with the pastor.“

Jim was careful not to be derogatory in any way in response and following the prayer meeting things calmed down for a season.

Mission Control

As summer approached, Jim wanted to take a mission trip with the students.

He was thinking a sports camp or VBS. He proposed the idea to Pastor Carl and, to Jim’s surprise, the pastor said it would be acceptable.

Jim had heard of a Colorado church planter looking for a sports camp. He made contact and began arranging for his students to lead the camp. However, soon after Jim began planning, the pastor organized a trip with the church planter for an adult group from the church. It appeared to Jim “it was an ego thing. Like he needed to have a trip if I was.“

Before Jim left on the mission trip, Pastor Carl called him to his office and told him he did not feel Jim was responsible or qualified enough to lead the trip and so he “was going to appoint a chaperone.” Jim knew the man chosen and had a good relationship with him, but would not have appointed him because he had alcohol and abuse issues.

Jim said, “[The chaperone] would often talk about his anger issues…he was jailed as a minor for beating someone almost to death. Kind of proud that it didn’t show up in his criminal record because he was a minor.” Jim also noted he made girls feel uncomfortable to be with him. “On the trip he made lots of comments about women’s bodies and what he liked,” Jim explained.

Used Against Him

It seemed to be a common tactic of Pastor Carl to use things against Jim that would never have been considered negative in the first place or were of little consequence.

On the mission trip, Jim drove the entire trip to Colorado because the chaperone had bragged about his “dangerous driving.” Later the pastor suggested Jim was being dangerous by not allowing the chaperone to help drive the long trip.

After the prayer meeting ordeal one of the leaders suggested that Jim and Pastor Carl go through mediation. The denominational leadership suggested they go through individual counseling first.

So, Jim made arrangements for counseling figuring the pastor would as well. He said, “After a couple visits, the counselor said I don’t know why you need to be here.” Jim fulfilled his commitment and then found out the pastor did not attend any counseling.

But later Pastor Carl said Jim had psychological issues because he had gone to counseling.

The pastor also used people against Jim and Mary.

After Jim had left the church, the chaperone of the mission trip came to him and apologized. He said he was glad to have a friendship with Jim. Apparently, Pastor Carl had asked the chaperone lots of questions about Jim after the trip, but the chaperone had nothing bad to say about Jim’s leadership.

The chaperone felt badly that the pastor had used him.

A new woman began coming to the church and applied to be a nursery worker. Jim and Mary got to know her and enjoyed her friendship. She asked if she could help with Jim and Mary’s kids. One night she babysat for them and when Jim and Mary returned from their date she stuck around talking with them. She asked them many questions about their “thoughts on the pastor.” They said very little.

They realized later she was being used by him to determine if they were against Pastor Carl.

Another couple offered to watch their kids and later were “bad-mouthing” Jim’s ministry behind his back despite their sweetness to Jim and Mary.

Final Straws

Jim & Mary: Pastoral Abuse Part 2.

A Cry for Justice: Judgment and Forgiveness

Posted on by
1

Among those who have been abused there is a constant friction between the belief that God calls us to forgive our enemies and God’s desire for justice to reign.

How are these two seemingly contradictory and mutually exclusive attitudes to be reconciled?

In a recent interview of a pastoral leadership abuse survivor, my interviewee said he realized that forgiveness was not an option but necessary in his walk with the Lord. But understanding how it can take place in the midst of such hurt was difficult for him.

When we returned from the mission field, having been beaten up by the leadership of our mission, we struggled with this question. We desired to follow the Lord in his leading; to not be like the master’s servant who had been forgiven much and yet sent his own servant packing to jail [Matthew 18:21-35].

But it was difficult to make theological or emotional sense of justice and forgiveness.

A Cry for Justice

Shelley Hundley, the author of “A Cry for Justice: Overcome Anger, Reject Bitterness, and Trust in Jesus Who Will Fight For You,” does a marvelous job explaining how we can move from anger and bitterness to forgiveness without forgetting justice.[1]

How is it possible to seek justice for these horrible wrongs committed and forgive?

This blog is in part dedicated to holding abusive leaders accountable [justice] for their actions, a mark of the true church.[2] Biblically, justice is clearly an important attribute of God’s character and a legitimate desire of man having been made in his image.

Yet, the grace found in forgiveness is also characteristic of our Creator who sent his Son to die on the cross for the forgiveness of our sins and who commands that we go and do likewise.

Finding Forgiveness in Justice

Hundley, who suffered sexual mollestation as a child of missionary parents in Columbia by a pastor, explains that she found forgiveness in God’s justice.

The work of Dr. Robert Burns has been helpful to me for several years in understanding a two-fold approach to forgiveness [see this blog].[3] Hundley adds some helpful perspective.

Often we think forgiveness is sweeping the wrongs we have suffered under the rug. Forgive and forget, just as Psalm 103 seems to say:

For as high as the heavens are above the earth,
so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him;
as far as the east is from the west,
so far does he remove our transgressions from us.

Psalm 103:11-12 (ESV)

However, Hundley points out that it is in the justice of God that forgiveness can truly be offered to our offenders. She explains,

“As believers, we are no longer objects of God’s wrath, but we are objects of His jealous love.” [page 110]

That “jealous love” of Jesus Christ works out in protecting His “bride,” the church. As His bride, I am taken under his care and he will go to the end of the heavens to protect me from evil…in fact, ultimately he died for my protection.

Hundley notes that others tried to encourage her by saying things like there would be “light at the end of the tunnel because ‘things would get better.'” She added, “In the darkest moments of my journey, pats on the back and teary-eyed sympathy brought little consolation.”

God is Judge

What did bring healing for her was the recognition that Jesus was Judge! And as her “groom,” He would stand by her in the injustice of her suffering.

She points to Romans 12:

If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”

Romans 12:18-19 (ESV)

She says that knowing God as Judge gives us a totally different perspective.

It enables us to leave room for God to right the wrongs and to trust that our heavenly Judge will make sure we have what we need. [page 153]

But as Christians we are not sitting there, licking our lips, waiting for the gavel to fall on the heads of our tormentors. Rather, we can know and trust that there are three possible judgements God brings on our oppressors and he knows which is best:

  • ultimate judgment,
  • forgiveness through his judgment of the oppressor’s sin on Jesus’ cross,
  • or temporal judgment.

Ultimate judgment is hell. And as Hundley notes, when you recognize the wrath of God on those who reject him, it may be difficult to pray for this kind of judgment even on your worse enemies.

On the other hand, God may forgive him, choosing to save the oppressor from his sin and radically change him. It is for sinners that Jesus died that they may be forgiven.

And finally, temporal judgment may be that the oppressor actually knows the Lord and God determines to take him out of this life so that he will no longer oppress others.

Unlocking the Chains

Dr. Edith Eva Eger, the writer of “The Choice: Embrace the Possible,” was a teenager when her family was imprisoned at Auschwitz. She now speaks on PTSD for “military resiliency training.” [4]

In her book, she discusses her own struggle with forgiveness. She said,

“It is easy to make a prison out of our pain, out of the past. At best revenge is useless…at worst, revenge perpetuates the cycle of hate.” [page 176]

She goes on to say that she forgave Hitler not for him, but for herself. Eger says that the chains she had kept him in encircled her own life. It kept her locked in her grief. She needed to forgive.

She defines forgiveness:

“To forgive is to grieve for what happened, for what didn’t happen, and to give up the need for a different past. To accept life as it was and as it is.” [page 176]

Though not a Christian, Eger recognizes the power and importance of forgiveness. As Christians we can read her words and recognize a call to give up living to meet out justice on our oppressors. Rather, as Christians, we have a loving Groom who is powerful enough and wise enough to wrap his everlasting arms around us and provide justice in his time and way.

Rest in those arms.

 

NOTES:

1  Shelley, Hundley. A Cry for Justice: Overcome Anger, Reject Bitterness, and Trust in Jesus Who Will Fight For You. Charisma House, 2011.
2  Hyde, Daniel. “Marks of a True Church: Exercise of Church Discipline.” Ligonier Ministries. https://www.ligonier.org/blog/marks-true-church-exercise-church-discipline/.
3  Burns, Bob, and Michael J. Brissett. The Adult Child of Divorce. Nashville, TN: Oliver-Nelson Books, 1991.
4  Eger, Dr Edith Eva. The Choice: Embrace the Possible. Reprint edition. Scribner, 2018.

The Benefit of the Doubt: The Ethics of Confrontation

Posted on by
4

It is a strange concept, but scripture actually instructs us to approach different people differently.

We are an egalitarian society. Some call it a “low power” culture. We like our relationships to be on equal footing. We believe, because “all men are created equal,” we should be able to approach all men (women) equally.

But, though God has indeed created all men to be equally responsible in his sight and they have all equally been born with a sin nature, we are not all equal.

But I am not talking about authority structures. Some people, of course, are in authority and some under authority. I am talking about how we engage in relationships when a person has sinned against us.

We are not equal when it comes to approachability.

How do we confront people when they sin against us?

I have been taught that giving the benefit of the doubt is the most biblical response to sin. I have been taught and have received, as my own, the adage that we should always, I mean always, give the benefit of the doubt when someone offends me. There is much in scripture to support this response to conflict.

Though it may be hard to tell from my writing, I have the gift of mercy. That gift is closely associated with giving the benefit of the doubt. But in this article I want to show that when it comes to confronting abusive individuals, giving the benefit of the doubt is not necessarily biblical.

Proverbs and Confrontation

Beginning with the wisdom found in Proverbs, it is evident the wise one had experienced individuals who were abusers. Some of the normal character traits of an abuser are:

  • Extreme self-centeredness [entitlement] – they are always the most important person in the relationship.
  • Lack of humility – inability to receive any kind of criticism. They are never wrong.
  • Blame-shifting – because they are never wrong, someone else is.

Proverbs 8:13 says, “The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil. Pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate.”

If you love the Lord, you will hate evil. And the wise one notes what that evil is: “pride and arrogance, the way of evil, and perverted speech.” These are all related and build upon one another, pride being the foundation.

As one who follows Christ, it is wise to hate pride…one of the most basic character traits of an abuser. This is a self-centered, entitled pride. It is a focus on self. Stay clear of it. “Hate it,” says the wise one.

Do Not Reprove a Scoffer

That hatred of the pride of the abuser may drive you to confront it. They may have hurt you deeply. They may be causing harm to others…in fact, likely are causing harm to others. They may be making your job miserable.

Or you may just want to give them the benefit of the doubt. Give them a chance to explain their actions.

But there are real difficulties in confronting their entitlement.

Moving ahead one chapter in Proverbs, the wise one says, “Whoever corrects a scoffer gets himself abuse, and he who reproves a wicked man incurs injury.” [Proverbs 9:7] The “scoffer” can be defined as one who scorns, talks arrogantly, or boasts.

This passage is of immesurable worth to those oppressed by toxic leaders at work or at home with an abuser. But the wisdom presented is seemingly contrary to all we have heard from our pulpits and in Bible studies: Give the benefit of the doubt. Always go to those who sin against you [Matthew 18 principle]. Always forgive and forget.

However, the Bible does not present a cookie-cutter method for engaging the sinful behaviour of others. Different people respond differently. And scripture tells us this:

You will incur injury if you confront a scoffer.

Note what the wise one goes to say:

8 Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you;
      reprove a wise man, and he will love you.
9 Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be still wiser;
      teach a righteous man, and he will increase in learning.

This is very different than the Matthew 18 steps:

  1. Confront the one who sins against you one-on-one.
  2. Brings someone with you if he doesn’t respond.
  3. Take it to the church if he doesn’t respond to this.
  4. Treat him as an unbeliever if he doesn’t respond to the church.

It is as if, in the case of the “scoffer,” you jump to step four. Whereas you can go to your “normal” sinner and challenge him for his sin (one-on-one), the abuser will cause injury and hate you.

What happened to the benefit of the doubt. What happened to “process” as presented by Jesus in Matthew’s Gospel?

People are different and the abuser (toxic leader) is not approachable. And Jesus does not expect or command you to approach him (or her) in the same way as those who are normal sinners. There are a number of reasons for this.

Bold Love

Dan Allender, a Christian clinical psychologist who has written much on abuse, gives very helpful wisdom gained from years of experience caring for those who have been abused. He masterfully handles the application of the Gospel to those situations in his book, Bold Love.

He builds a strong Biblical case for understanding the abuser as “evil.” And he says, building on Proverbs, “Evil can never be overthrown through rational, reasonable argumentation.” [page 243]

The steps taken, beginning with one-on-one confrontation, in Matthew 18 are founded upon rational, reasonable argumentation. In approaching a brother who has sinned against us, we take for granted they will be rational and reasonable and hear our struggle with their sin…and hopefully repent. We have well-founded hope that he will respond. It may take a couple (or three) confrontations with expanding forcefulness (adding more people to the mix as Jesus instructs), but in time we have the hope he will turn from his sin.

We give some benefit of the doubt.

However, the abuser “regularly and masterfully, portrays his motives and behavior as innocent. Others just do not understand. He is deceitfully gifted in making the victim of his abuse feel like the perpetrator of the harm.” [page 236]

He turns up the abuse, shifting the blame as Allender says. He is not safe.

He will hate you

The wise one in Proverbs 9:8 says the “scoffer will hate you” if you approach him. Note, this is not just a hatred expressed in disagreeing with you and ignoring you. It is a hatred found in Matthew 7 where Jesus says the “dog” will “turn and attack you.”  If he were to just ignore your confrontation, no problem.

But the wise one says it is dangerous and he helpfully tells you to turn around and walk the other way. Allender says,

Evil has a keen smell for false gods. It will sense what our heart truly loves and worships, and threaten the weakest, most ungodly chinks in our armor in order to keep love mute. [page 244]

Abusers (scoffers) do not just turn heals and run from confrontation. They do not just disagree with you. They will find your weakness and exploit it. They are master manipulators and will do all they can to bring you down while placing themselves on the pedestal.

So, how do you apply the Gospel to abuse?

Because abuse can never be won over by rational argument, Allender says abusers must simply be held accountable. He says,

If evil consistently wins, it will see more evil as the only strategy for keeping its victory spoils and gaining new rewards. One of the greatest gifts one can give a person inclined to evil is the strength to frustrate their attempts to dominate. [page 243]

You apply the Gospel by not letting toxic individuals get away with manipulation. You apply the Gospel by holding them accountable and stopping them. It is important for those in authority to stand in for the oppressed. [Isaiah 61:1-2]

The church can play a major role in this process. If the leadership understands abuse they can help each other not be taken in by the abuser’s tactics to control and manipulate. And they can set boundaries to hold him accountable for his actions. They can confront him as presented by Jesus in the third step of the Matthew 18 principle.

In addition, the church can provide safety for those who have been oppressed by an abuser…an ear to hear the target’s struggles and a place for healing. A place where they can be believed and given the benefit of the doubt.

NOTES:

Allender, Dan B., and Tremper Longman III. Bold Love. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2014.

Forgiveness: Mimicking Jesus

Posted on by
5

I remember seeing pictures in a news magazine of high school students holding up a banner that read something like, “Josh, we forgive you.” Josh (a fictitious name) was the murderer of several of their classmates in a school shooting many years ago.

The question the article asked was whether it was appropriate for the students to forgive Josh for his horrendous evil. Josh had never sought their forgiveness. Nor were they the actual victims of his violence.

Dr. Robert Burns and Michael Brissett, in a helpful book called, “The Adult Child of Divorce,” discuss forgiveness from a very practical and biblical perspective.

The authors begin their section on forgiveness with the statement:

Some encourage the offended to absorb their pain and release the offender. Others urge those who hurt to simply turn to God and confess it. Then, they are assured, God will resolve the pain, and everything will be fine. A third approach is to tell those unable to forgive to examine their own lives. They should see what mistakes they have made – even if the mistake is carrying pain toward those who harmed them – and seek forgiveness from the ones they can’t seem to forgive.

You have likely heard these responses.

One of the greatest struggles for Christians beat up by toxic leaders is how to fulfill God’s calling to forgive those who have hurt them. Frequently, they ask questions about what it means to forgive and whether they should even forgive the horrendous evil they have experienced.

Generally, there is no shortage of well-meaning Christian brothers and sisters who will come their aid in providing answers. “Of course, you must forgive them. The Bible tells you so!”

But take a look, as Burns and Brissett do in their book, at the passage on forgiveness in Ephesians:

Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.

[Ephesians 4:32]

We are called to forgive one another….as God in Christ forgave you. It is that last clause that is often overlooked or not completely understood.

How did Jesus Christ forgive you?

The Legal Side of Forgiveness

The authors talk about “two sides of forgiveness.” As they note,

“If I break the law, that law says I must legally pay a penalty…We haven’t lived perfect lives. Because God is holy and perfect, He will legally accept only perfect people, and because we have broken His law, a penalty must be paid before he can accept us.”

Fortunately, for God’s created world and sinful man, Jesus Christ died on the cross to take the penalty for those sins. He provided the legal means of taking care of the judgment that was due to us, providing forgiveness from the perfect Judge, Almighty God.

He holds out that offer of forgiveness to all who have sinned…that happens to be everyone conceived in this world.

However, as those who know scripture realize, not everyone is forgiven. There is another side to the coin of forgiveness as the authors put it.

The Relational Side of Forgiveness

Peter preached to the household of Cornelius saying,

“To [Jesus] all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”

[Acts 10:43 (ESV)]

The sins of those who believe in the work of Jesus Christ on the cross are forgiven. The sins of those who reject him are not.

Those who recognize they are “sinners,” in need of Jesus’ saving work and who camp at Jesus’ doorstep to seek his forgiveness are forgiven. Those who do not consider their failures worthy of judgment are not forgiven.

To come into “relationship” with Jesus we need forgiveness. He has offered it to all, but only those who receive that offer will be forgiven and be in relationship with the Lord.

How Does that Work Between People?

So, when do we forgive others according to Paul in Ephesians 4:32?

When our offender seeks forgiveness. When they recognize their sin against you and come to you asking for your forgiveness, you are to forgive them. In fact, Jesus said they should to be forgiven over and over should they ask. [Matthew 18:21-22]

This is what is taught in Luke 17:3-4. Jesus tells his disciples, if he repents, forgive him. “If he repents.”

This is the “relational” side of forgiveness of which Burns and Brissett speak.

So, when they “recognize [their] own failure” and acknowledge it to your face, you freely forgive just as Christ forgave you.

Forgiving the Toxic One

It just so happens that you find a rare abuser (in the workplace or the home) that will recognize their sin, acknowledge it, and accept their responsibility. They rarely darken your door humbly seeking forgiveness.

In fact, the defining characteristic of being an “abuser” is the complete lack of humility to admit wrong. [see blog]

Though there may not be relational forgiveness between you and your tormentor, bringing reconciliation, there is still a need to forgive him (or her) nonetheless.

The authors point to Matthew 5:21-22 where Jesus teaches that when a brother harbors anger against another brother, he is a “murderer.”

It is important to note that there is a righteous anger that is taught in scripture [see blog], but where there is bitterness and seeking of revenge, we need to take a close look at our motives.

We need to have an attitude of forgiveness (legal) though there may never come a time when our abuser seeks our forgiveness (relational). We need to live in this “legal side of forgiveness” by making it available to our antagonist should he humble himself.

Releasing Them

“Legally” forgiving those who sin against us does not necessarily release them from accountability however. It is still appropriate to seek legal, organizational, or corporate justice for the toxic individual.

But we need to recognize that Jesus’ forgiveness is ultimately the forgiveness he needs and we need to “release” him into the Lord’s hands that he may one day seek our and God’s forgiveness for their evil.

As the victims of our abuser’s violence, we can be like the servant in Jesus’ parable.  The “wicked servant” received forgiveness from his master for all he owed him (which was boatloads of cash) and turned around to require the small debt from those who owed him. [Matthew 18:23-35]

Or, as Jesus teaches, we can pass on the forgiveness we received from our master to our abuser.

However, until he recognizes his own failure, acknowledges it before God and you, and accept God’s solution for the problem, there will not be relational forgiveness and no reconciliation, between he and God or with you.

Nor does God expect there to be.

You need not feel guilt about his. You need not think you ought to have done more. You need not say, “Everything is alright . . . I am over it.” It is okay to grieve the loss of that relationship and your brother’s failure.

It just isn’t supposed to be like that.

NOTES:

Burns, Bob, and Michael J. Brissett. The Adult Child of Divorce. Nashville, TN: Oliver-Nelson Books, 1991.

Traumatic Praise: Well-Meaning Re-Abuse

Posted on by
1

How do we handle the praises given by others for those who have been our tormentors?

Recently, I was speaking with an abuse survivor who shared her struggle with people seemingly “marketing” her ex-husband-abuser to her. They felt it their place to share how he was such a “good man” and how he was deeply saddened by their divorce.

It was like she was experiencing the abuse all over again.

Many do not understand the trauma created by abuse. And many create more of it for those who have been targets because of their ignorant, though well-meaning, praise for the abuser.

When a leader passes, it is not unusual for the abusive leader to be praised on social media like any other leader. Maybe he did some good in his ministry. Even those hurt by his abuse can find “good” in his work. There is not a person created in the image of God that has not done some good in their life. And who wants to speak ill of the dead?

So, it is not surprising that people take to the cyber-waves and speak well of even an abusive leader.

And yet, there are people who were traumatized by the leader’s abuse of leadership. And as they read the posts of praise, their hearts are broken…again….and again.

Recently, a former leader of mine passed away. As I read the social media posts praising him, I struggled to keep perspective. I questioned whether I had truly forgiven him for his abuse of power because of my emotional reaction to the posts of others praising him.

I know at least one person struggled with how to respond to his death and even regretted having posted praises. His discomfort was the same discomfort that kept me from posting. He had faced the leader’s abuse, but giving honor for that which the leader did well won out where it did not for me.

Doubts

As I read the posts of others I had doubts:

  • Did the abusive mission leader really call another man’s language “primitive” (not English) when the man had beautifully created songs and poems based on the Gospel of John in his mother tongue?
  • Did he really tell a guard at the mission compound to kick the old women and widows out of the compound because they were using the mission’s well-water, the only water available in the area due to shortages in the village across the street?
  • Did he really preach that God was maybe going to strike his students with lightening because they had an unsanctioned meeting instead of coming to hear his chapel sermon?
  • Did he really tell his daughter, and one of my wife’s best friends, that she was a traitor for talking to my wife after we resigned from the mission?
  • Maybe he wasn’t so bad afterall?

I did not want to be bitter. I wanted to be able to join them in speaking well of the dead. But whenever the thought of following their example came to mind, I was unable to put my fingers to the keyboard.

Insignificant Trauma

Though I have no doubt I continue to harbour at least a small amount of bitterness and unforgiveness, God’s people are called to stand for the oppressed; to seek justice. My motives are impure, but this is the story of our lives as we seek to follow the Lord. Our motives will always be impure at best but we continue on to do what the Lord calls us to do.

Capitulating

It seems that praising a man, who has treated God’s image bearers so badly, is capitulating to that abuse rather than acknowledging and confronting it.

Most importantly it seems that praising him simply tells others that their hurt is unimportant, insignificant, or something they should just get over.

My friend, who suffered the praise of her abuser by others, felt isolated. She had the sense that others expected her to simply get over the hurt, to trust the man who had abused her for years. The re-traumatizing has had a horrific effect on her emotional health though she continues to trust that the Lord loves her deeply as His daughter.

The years targets of abuse spend seeking healing can be in part undone when others ignorantly suggest, “He just must not be that bad. He did so much good.” 

We all need to be sensitive to the added trauma that can result from our well-meaning praise.

Imprecatory Praying: The Mercy of Destruction

Posted on by
7

Our CEO’s wife was a bear. She bragged how she would run off roommates in college so she could have the room to herself. She had not changed in the ensuing years.

On the other hand, her husband was rather charming. You mostly knew where you stood with her—in the doghouse. But, her husband? He manipulated circumstances with great skill. 

There are times when a Christian struggles with what kind of attitude he should have towards a boss who seems quite beyond the reach of the Gospel.

Maybe the boss is unwilling to see his evil behavior. Maybe the power differential between the boss and subordinate makes it non-condusive to confronting the boss’ sin. Maybe attempts have been made to bring reconciliation in the relationship and failed miserably. In fact, maybe the attempts made it even worse.

Christians read the Psalms and find statements that seem to conflict with the open-hearted, mercy-oriented, forgiveness-driven Gospel we preach from our pulpits. King David, a man after God’s own heart, says,

For it is not an enemy who taunts me—
then I could bear it;
it is not an adversary who deals insolently with me—
then I could hide from him.
But it is you, a man, my equal,
my companion, my familiar friend.
We used to take sweet counsel together;
within God’s house we walked in the throng.
Let death steal over them;
let them go down to Sheol alive;
for evil is in their dwelling place and in their heart.

Psalms 55:12-15 (ESV)

Imprecatory Psalms

Psalm 55 is among the Psalms called “imprecatory.” These Psalms are those that call for the destruction of or curses upon the enemy of the writer. An article on the Bible Gateway website lists Psalms 5, 10, 17, 35, 58, 59, 69, 70, 79, 83, 109, 129, 137, and 140 as imprecatory Psalms.[1]

One commentary on the imprecatory Psalms said, “These prayers awaken the conscience to the human cry for redress, the cosmic demand for moral order and justice. They can lead one to feel as deeply as one ought the horrendous insult to Yahweh and his creation perpetrated by those who lie and cheat and kill and abuse and blaspheme . . .These prayers awaken that outrage, which is to be offered to God and which motivates to redemptive action.“

Discomfort with Judgment

When I have spoken with Christian employees about Psalm 55, they were clearly uncomfortable with the judgmental character of it. Even among theologians there is obvious discomfort. More often than not, the words of David are ignored or downplayed and it is suggested we should pray for evil people to be redeemed—not destroyed.

It was not until serving under a toxic boss and doing research into the dynamics of abuse that I began to understand the imprecatory Psalms.

In Matthew 7, Jesus calls those who do not respond well to confrontation “pigs,” and suggests silence rather than confrontation. David, in Psalm 55, takes it a step further, praying for the judgment and destruction of his enemies. He says, with apparent assurance, “But you, O God, will cast them down into the pit of destruction.”[2]

A Familiar Friend

To many who have suffered under toxic leadership, David’s struggle is very familiar as it was for my wife and me. David noted that his enemy is not an unknown person. He is David’s friend. David calls him “my equal, my companion, my familiar friend.”[3]

David says he could have tolerated “oppression and fraud,” however “what incurs his wrath is the treachery of a trusted friend.”[4] The psalmist explains it was not an adversary who oppressed him, but an individual with whom he took “sweet counsel together.”

The word counsel “implies intimacy,” according to The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. Donald Guthrie says, David “had known unity of heart” with this friend “as they worshipped God” together.[5]

Some of those with whom I have spoken believed they had good relationships with their leader. Many worshiped, worked, recreated, and socialized with their leader. The Christian organization is sometimes a family-like setting. Often the mission station is a tight-knit group living communally.

Adam, a missionary in Africa, believed his relationship with the CEO was professional, but he also recalled being taken to dinner and enjoying family outings together. Graham said, “We really, really thought we were a Christian family.” My family went on vacations, to dinner, concerts, and to church with our leaders.

When abuse became apparent, the participants were often surprised and confused by the dysfunction in the organization. They, like abuse victims Lundy Bancroft describes, were perplexed by the cruelty displayed by these “friends.”[6]

However, like some commentators, the participants were hesitant to pray as David prayed in their situation. Guthrie said David was God’s “anointed king” and so had a get out of jail free card. He distinguished his circumstances from normal relational conflict. Yet, the Psalms were sung in worship by all Israel, not just David.

Graham, an one of my interviewees, specifically sought to keep such thoughts of “adversary” or “enemy” out of the team’s thinking as he and other employees went through the steps of confrontation with the CEO. To this day he refuses to use this terminology. I heard about a well-known pastor’s experience when an elder in his church was creating division and strife. People were praying for the pastor and the elder died unexpectedly. But, the pastor was unwilling to suggest it was due to God’s judgment.

The Prerogative of a Sovereign God

However, one of the commentators on Psalm 55, Gerhard Vos, believes it is appropriate to ask for God’s judgment on evil. He says, “The total destruction of evil . . . is the prerogative of the sovereign God.” Some consider it “loving” to refrain from praying for the destruction of an evil person. But, it is important to consider not only the perpetrator, but his victims.

How loving is it to suggest the diabolical one keep reaping destruction on his followers? Is it not more loving to look out for those under his oppression—a perspective that God seems to lean heavily towards in His Word—rather than in any way supporting the abuser? Even when a deeply, unrepentant, evil person repents, it is likely the abuse will continue for some time while God sanctifies him.

Vos goes on to say,

“It is right not only to pray for the accomplishment of this destruction, but even to assist in effecting it when commanded to do so by God himself.”[7]

The Ethical Problem of the Imprecatory Psalms

“Assisting” in the destruction, as Vos suggests, may mean seeking his firing. Or calling him to account before others. The final steps of the Matthew 18 principle of confrontation involve group confrontation and shame. This may be the only way others will find relief from his abuse. 

This is loving!

There is a clear distinction in scripture between those who continually refuse repentance and those who have a “heart of flesh” that is teachable. There is a time when trying to “work with someone” comes to an end and public disgrace is necessary to bring justice to the broken-hearted.

This is God-given direction for confronting evil: Praying that God’s mercy will save those suffering from the destruction of the evildoer and doing all in our legitimate power to stop the abuse.

NOTES

[1] “Imprecatory Psalms,” Biblegateway, accessed March 14, 2017, https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/asbury-bible-commentary/Imprecatory-Psalms.

[2] Psalm 55:23.

[3] Psalm 55:13.

[4] Guthrie et al., The New Bible Commentary, 485.

[5] Ibid., 486.

[6] Lundy Bancroft, Why Does He Do That?, 68.

[7] Gerhard Vos, “The Ethical Problem of the Imprecatory Psalms,” 135.