Have you ever seen a leader boast in his weaknesses?
First of all, in his job interview he shared all the amazing leadership qualities he possesses and all the victories on the field of organizational management he attained.
And second, all those followers must be given confidence in his acuity and wisdom.
So, what if a leader boasted in his weaknesses?
The Apostle Paul, one of the greatest leaders of the world-wide Christian church said,
Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.
2 Cor 12:7-9
Paul filled a significant amount of the New Testament with his writing . . . but he never had a press secretary or agent.
We live in a marketing-rich environment. The purveyors of product hype bludgeon us with their images and words through every form of communication—and there are many forms of communication nowadays.
It is taken for granted that even within Christianity, founded upon the testimonies of people like Paul, to reach a world lost in sin our churches and Christian organizations must boast rather in our strengths; our programs, our giving, our service to our communities; it is church-growth 101.
But what if our leaders boasted in their weakness?
Well, then I guess Christ’s strength would rest on them.
Maybe it would show that we are a broken and needy people and that Christ is our Savior in all ways.
It could possibly show that we depend on the One Who created us in His image.
And maybe, in so doing, our LORD would take care of the rest.
Humility
I have written often about humility (here, here, and here). Humility is a key ingredient to good leadership and noticeably lacking in toxic leadership. Humility is necessary if we are to “boast in our weakness.”
In my years of research, interviews, and experience, it is humility that is the game-changer every time. I hear sufferers of toxic leadership use the term or synonyms all the time. It is the difference between a good leader and a bad leader. It is the difference between a toxic leader and a godly leader.
Quite frankly, it is the difference between a pleasant person and a rotten person.
Christopher Hutchinson wrote,
“I believe humility to be at the very heart of Christian faith and even to be the best paradigm of all proper thought regarding God, oneself, and others.”1
Amy Edmondson argues that humility is not something that comes easily for those who are in high positions.2 When looking down on subordinates, receiving their praise and accolades, even the humblest can begin to believe his own press. Christian leadership requires an attitude and action of a servant on behalf of those who are subordinate. Leaders must go beyond their own comfort and needs, setting aside the world’s motivations of ego, money, and pride, as Maxwell notes.3
But “lording it over” others, as Jesus says, is a basic temptation for Christian leaders (Matt. 20:25) as it is for anyone else. Edmondson says, “It can be hard for people to muster both the humility and the genuine curiosity that is needed to really learn from others.”4 It is humility that makes it possible for us to learn, and this is foundational to the work of a team whether on the sports field, in the rehearsal hall, secular corporation, or Christian ministry.
So, what if a leader boasted in his or her weaknesses? What if they gathered up the humility to proclaim their weakness and their need for Jesus Christ? Rather than continually defending themselves and blaming others, our leaders admitted failure and sought forgiveness and reconciliation?
Maybe, “Christ’s strength would rest on” them.
References
Christopher Hutchinson, Rediscovering Humility: Why the Way Up Is Down (Kindle: New Growth Press, 2018), loc. 280. ↩︎
Amy C. Edmondson, Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy, 1st edition (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2012), 62. ↩︎
John C. Maxwell, “Reflections on Challenge the Process,” pp. 71–84 in Christian Reflections on The Leadership Challenge, edited by James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner, 1st edition (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2006), 72. ↩︎
Amy C. Edmondson, Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy, 1st edition (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2012), 62. ↩︎
As a child, my mother grew up with an abusive father. I didn’t know this until I was almost 60 years old.
I had been studying abuse for several years and then we had a talk. The grandfather I knew was my grandmother’s second marriage. He was good, kind, and gentle. He was an absolute dear of a man.
But the father my mother grew up with until she was 16 years old was abusive. Controlling, entitled, and unfit to be a husband and father. He left that year for a job in Canada and didn’t return.
My grandmother proceeded to finish raising her five children without aid, working hard and showing her children a mettle that would forever form them.
My mother, who watched her mother suffer – as she did herself – under the toxic husband and father, would be a resilient and loving person of whom all who knew her spoke praises upon praises. She became a feminist of the kind that recognized women have value. And she had grown up seeing that value undermined at every turn.
My grandmother would go on to be a publicly elected official and serve her community for many years.
My mother became a writer who celebrated the people of her community for many years as a journalist.
Then finally, in her waning years, published a book about an elected official who had gone against the political grain of his community, including Macarthyism, to support the vulnerable.
My mother, who defended me, even when I was indefensible, passed from life in October of 2023. I will miss her deeply but know that she sought to raise her own five children to use their gifting to seek the good of their neighbor as she did.
I pray that I will defend the vulnerable as she did . . . if only half as much.
A Tribute to My Mother:
Our friend and hero Charlotte Dehnert passed away this fall. We want to honor her memory by sharing the brilliant story that inspired the creation of the Bookmarked community. Charlotte was a local author who entered the library with the great news of publishing her book Lester Callaway Hunt: He Put Wyoming’s Bucking Horse On the Map, a Biography. She presented her book to the on-duty librarian, Ami, hopeful for help in getting the word out. Ami saw an opportunity and began to organize around the idea that the literary artists who call Wyoming home deserve to be celebrated. Bookmarked Literary Arts Festival was born so that Charlotte and a state full of hopeful, blossoming Wyoming authors can have a cheering section waiting to welcome any new creation they are ready to share!
Ami Vincent, Director and Founder of the Bookmarked Festival
“The exercise of authority is designed to serve the well-being of those under its care,” says Timothy Witmer, author of “Shepherd Leader.”[1]
That seems basic to the Christian, and yet how many bosses view their leadership this way?
The pastor of the local church has been given the authority and responsibility to care for his congregation made up of people often referred to as “sheep” in scripture.[2] The analogy of sheep is apt as they are particularly vulnerable to predators and have an extraordinary propensity for self-harm.
A sheep rancher in Wyoming responded to a school child who asked if sheep sleep at night, saying, “No, they lay awake thinking up new ways to die!”
The picture painted of the pastor in scripture is that of a “shepherd” who protects the sheep. As a shepherd of these sheep, the pastor is charged with being “motivated by love for the Lord” that is expressed by “words and deeds” says Richard Rardin, author of “The Servant’s Guide to Leadership: Beyond First Principles.”[3]
Rardin says that the “servant of God must die to self before he or she can be of much use to the Father.”[4] This means the pastor is at heart willing to set aside his own comforts for the care of the congregation, putting the interests of the congregation above his own.
Unfortunately, some ministries fail due to shepherds who take advantage of their position and power over the sheep.
To add to the complexities of such circumstances there may exist “mid-level management” in the form of a pastor’s assistant who must navigate between submission to a senior pastor’s authority (giving honor to those who teach – 1 Tim. 5:17) and shepherding the congregation (having been called to a pastoral position).
The assistant who seeks to lead from the “second chair,” drawing on the terminology of the position of those in an orchestra or jazz ensemble who perform under the “first chair” or lead player, must walk a fine line between having authority and being under authority.
This is particularly treacherous when the senior pastor is acting like a wolf rather than shepherd.
John’s Story
John’s story is very similar to Susie’s [her story]. I heard his story along with Susie’s nearly the same week.
John spent one and a half years serving his congregation before resigning, under pressure, due to the autocratic behavior of the Senior Pastor. He noted, as we talked, that his purpose for accepting the position was that Pastor “Jim” said, “I’ll train you, give you preaching [opportunities], visits . . . the whole gamut of ministry.”
John was very excited to gain valuable experience in ministry following his seminary training and this position appeared to provide the opportunity. However, John resigned from the position in large part due to the autocratic leadership of Pastor Jim.
Pastor Jim’s toxic leadership came out particularly in “pharisaical” ways which can be understood as practicing (and normally) advocating for extra-biblical rules, treating them as necessary for holiness.
The Pharisee
John described an incident when, as the Youth Pastor, he was encouraged to visit the local crisis pregnancy ministry. He spoke with the director, who had contracted HIV-AIDS from his wife, had experienced his baby (who also had HIV-AIDS) “die in his arms,” was divorced from this wife, and in the end became a Christian.
In the course of the discussion, John decided to bring him to speak to his youth group. There was a 16 year-old mother in the group and he hoped that it would be of real encouragement to her.
He approached Pastor Jim to seek permission. Because the crisis center director had an earring, John decided it would be wise to inform the pastor due to the “fundamentalist” leaning of the church.
After telling him about the earring, Pastor Jim “just killed it right there.”
Stuck in the Middle
In another incident, John was seeking permission to move the 16 year-old mother to the “college group” because “she was still of the mindset that [she was] a teenager” and he believed the college group would provide more maturation for her.
Again, Pastor Jim did not allow him to exercise his authority as the Youth Pastor and John was “stuck in the middle” between the pastor and families that were concerned for their own young children that were in the same group.
John found it necessary, as one under the authority of the pastor, to “come up with some reason of why the pastor [thought it] better to leave her” in the youth group to mediate between his boss and the anxious parents.
Shepherding the Agnostic
John said to me, “Shepherding is my favorite aspect of working in ministry” and related an opportunity he had to shepherd a teenager who had told his parents he was an “agnostic.” The teenager was finding it difficult to believe that his parents loved him and would support him despite his unbelief.
John was able to encourage him and help him through that time of questioning. The young man later turned to the Lord and John believed the Lord has used him in the young man’s life.
However, despite his success, John was placed in awkward positions with the senior pastor, particularly when he was leaving the ministry. His concern for the authority of the pastor and peace of the church was evident in our discussion.
Like Susie, John said, “I didn’t want to see the church hurt as I was leaving. I didn’t want to see a schism,” as he described two leaders in the church (Deacons) coming to him to discuss actions by the senior pastor. Though John did not mention the word, “gossip,” he implied that he was very careful with whom he spoke during the crises and when leaving the church.
He also sought to limit the relational damage of the pastor by speaking with few people in the church about his experiences. Though John was very careful to keep his frustration contained by sharing primarily with family members, he said,
“If I had had more interaction with the deacons, who were also frustrated, it would have been very difficult to stay supportive, to not complain, not gossip.”
The Emotional Damage
John experienced many opportunities to use his giftedness for the building of God’s kingdom in his assistant role in the church. However, he noted that seeking to work alongside a pastor that practices autocratic leadership can be emotionally damaging.
John spoke extensively about the emotional difficulties of ministering under Pastor Jim.
Again, like Susie, John observed multiple times when his supervising pastor was highly authoritative and hurtful to those under his care.
However, he realized the significance of the emotional injury only later, as Susie said when I interviewed her.
Long Time of Healing
John said he and his wife took a year and a half out from ministry to heal from the hurt caused by the pastor.
John noted that he spoke with both his father and uncle who are pastors, to gain perspective emotionally. As he evaluated his response to the toxic leadership of the pastor John noted that he “spent most of that year and half frustrated” and didn’t “have good spiritual disciplines established.”
Because of this, he said, “I didn’t process through things as I would have.” His year and a half out of ministry following his resignation was because he “was more broken than I should have been had I been processing my emotions more effectively.”
John believed that had he had a deeper relationship with the Lord, he would have seen his context more clearly and resigned more quickly.
However, according to John, that time of struggle in ministry was invaluable to his growth as a leader. He said,
“I learned from it that my relationship with Christ needs to be what gives me the confidence and satisfaction rather than my relationships with the pastor, or church . . . it needs to be much more personal . . . that union with Christ. Who am I in Christ?”
His ability to be self-differentiated, while operating in an environment of broken relationships and anxiety was a valuable lesson John learned. He shared that though he “didn’t have the guts to argue with [Pastor Jim] at that time,” he would at this point.
In addition, he learned that much of his training in seminary focused on the idea that the pastor receives the vision from God and passes it on to the congregation. Having experienced this form of leadership from Pastor Jim, he recognizes that it is actually devastating to ministry.
Sharing With Others
There can be many emotional challenges for the assistant as he interacts with members of the congregation and an autocratic senior pastor. John noted that most of the leadership (Deacons) in the church have since left the church primarily due to the autocratic leadership of the senior pastor.
When John was preparing to leave this particular ministry, two of the deacons came to him and asked him about his experiences with Pastor Jim. He said,
“I was much more open with them. I knew I could trust their discretion . . . not go blabbing around. I didn’t want to see the church hurt as I was leaving.”
But, to complicate matters, John explained that his supervising pastor was unlikely to respond to any confrontation by him or congregant members, having seen others seek reconciliation and fail.
When describing the pastor, John said,
“He was convinced of his philosophy of ministry so the problem was the church, it wasn’t him. I don’t feel like that there would have been a way for him to see his own shortcomings in that.”
Pastor Jim rejected any exhortation he was given, shifted the blame, or said he would try harder to no apparent effect.
He’s in Charge
John had an amicable relationship with Pastor Jim,
“But, I knew it was very clear, from the moment I got there, he made it very clear he’s the leader of this church. He’s in charge . . . So, the level of authority that he exhibited – that was intimidating to me, because I knew his word was final. So I wouldn’t ever push that.”
John felt “defeated, like my hands were tied. Like I had no authority.” He was given the task of leading the kids, but he had to do exactly what Pastor Jim told him to do.
“But, how exactly is that leadership? I don’t have any authority to make decisions.”
Having come to learn ministry, the actions of the pastor “really took the wind out of my sails.” There was very evident frustration in his voice as he described the inhibiting of his ability to minister to the youth by Pastor Jim’s authoritarianism.
Quitting Leaders
As James Kouzes and Barry Posner say, “People don’t quit their organizations; they quit their leaders.”[5]
It is not an infrequent occurrence that those who are called to gospel ministry find employment in churches led by autocratic pastors. The often devastating emotional effects on those who serve as their assistants are felt for years.
Rather than enter into a joint ministry that provides a learning environment for an inexperienced assistant, the assistant’s gifts are squandered by “self-serving leaders [who] use the trust and authority that accrues to them to help themselves” rather than train and equip their assistant in ministry.[6]
Those caught in these emotional triangles of pastor-assistant-church must navigate relationships that are fraught with emotion, balancing respect and submission to the senior pastor and care and shepherding for the congregation.
Because these senior pastors are often given extensive authority by elder and deacon boards that are more inclined to “herding instincts” – keeping the peace at all costs and doing what the pastor says – the assistant is left to cope with the emotional struggle, sometimes unaided by those in the church.
Assistants that have a high view of the Matthew 18 principles of confrontation have little recourse as the one with whom they seek to correct for the purpose of reconciliation holds the keys to the church humanly speaking and are unresponsive to confrontations described in Matthew 18.
Two to Tango
Of great concern for those who minister under the authority of autocratic leaders is the view that it “takes two to tango”.
This simplistic view does not take into consideration either the power structure inherent in the senior-assistant relationship, nor the dynamics of relating to the “ravenous wolves” that Jesus describes in Matthew 7:15-25.
Sometimes it is evident that the primary problem lies in the other person.
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.
One of the hardest things for someone to hear when going through a particularly difficult trial is, “Consider it joy! It will make you stronger.”
Yes, the Bible tells me so. But it so often seems so callous for someone to remind me of it. There might even be a smile that goes with it that makes me angry.
Those who are acting as counselors and advocates for abuse survivors have likely struggled with this issue. We want to encourage our clients and friends to rightful thinking which we know will lead to greater peace. We want them to see the good that can come from the trial that they may have a sense of peace in it.
And as we share these thoughts with them, we find that they shrink into a shell or become angry or walk away, never to return.
It just isn’t that simple to slather a verse on a victim’s pain. Have you noticed that taking one verse from the Bible is simple until you practice good exegesis and consider all those other verses that complicate things?
The Goal
First, I want to do some of that work on James 1:2-5 where the Lord tells us that the “testing of your faith produces steadfastness.” That is the reason why James says one verse before, “Count it all joy . . . when you meet trials of various kinds.”
There is a goal to suffering – that we be “perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.” That’s a pretty good trade off. That is what trials are intended to produce in us. And that is why James tells us to “count it all joy.”
Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible helpfully says, “Not that these afflictions were joyous in themselves, but in their circumstances, effects, and consequences.”
The goal is joyous.
It is not the trial that is joyous. The trial is not intended to make us happy. In fact, to be a trial it needs to do quite the opposite. It creates hurt, disappointment, maybe confusion, and frustration. That is why it is called a trial. It challenges how we view our lives.
It causes us to take stock of our beliefs and desires and expectations.
I face trials when my boss or spouse is manipulating, demeaning, shaming, or blaming me. When my manager takes credit for the work I do. When my spouse tells me I am stupid, or my pastor preaches shamefully from the pulpit referring to something I said to him earlier in the week supposedly in confidence.
I am not expected to take joy from the trial. And so, we must be careful to distinguish between expecting someone to be joyful about the trial, rather than taking joy in the knowledge of the outcome.
Who among us knows what is God’s specific purpose for another man’s trial? Who can with confidence give that kind of judgment.
God does not always show His hand immediately or within the trial itself. At times it is mysterious. Consider Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” in 2 Corinthians 12:7-9. Paul has some knowledge – it is there to keep him from being “conceited” – but why doesn’t God take it away? Paul begged that the Lord would do so, but He did not remove it by the time of Paul’s writing.
It is not my place to tell a victim why they are suffering. And then tell them, “Count it all joy!”
They will likely, though not necessarily, learn what the Lord is specifically teaching them. Give the Lord His room.
Weep
So, what do we do? What is the godly response?
We must be careful in our expectations for those who are suffering horribly from the abuse of a wicked individual – whether a boss, boyfriend, neighbor, or husband. In the midst of that suffering, jumping for joy neither makes sense nor generally happens.
This is a broken world, and a giddiness about that brokenness is never suggested in Scripture. Don’t expect your friend or counselee to be rejoicing in the way you think of rejoicing in the midst of their abuse. It is unreasonable and unlikely.
So, the first step in hearing of abuse of any kind is “weep with those who weep.”
The full verse in Romans says:
Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight.
Romans 12:15-16 (ESV)
Humility. No conceit. No arrogance.
If you are counseling or advocating for a victim of leadership abuse (in the home or workplace), you need to humbly respond to their suffering. As they pass through the fire of trial, they need to be shown respect and their trial needs to be honored.
Weep with them. It is not a time of rejoicing when they face various trials.
But when the goal of that trial – their perfection and completion – is accomplished, it will be a time of rejoicing.
In the trial, it is a time of weeping and seeking the wisdom only God can give as James goes on to say:
If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.
James 1:5
Weep with them as they face the struggle. And seek wisdom as to how to respond to that trial with them.
Empathy
In essence, we are talking about being empathetic. No matter what foolish theologians say about empathy, Romans 12 is about empathy. God desires you to be empathetic . . . to appreciate and understand another man’s travail. And you are to weep with them when they weep.
In time, hopefully you can rejoice when they rejoice.
However, as you empathize with your friend, you may encourage them on a path to the point of considering it joy. As the “Barnes’ Notes on the Bible” says,
You are not to consider it as a punishment, a curse, or a calamity, but as a fit subject of felicitation.
Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
When facing abuse, many victims feel that they are cursed. They may think they are being punished by the Lord much like many of the Psalmists.
But abuse is never the result of the victim’s actions. It is because the abuser has an unrepentant heart. He is sick in sin. It is HIS fault, not the victim’s.
So, encouraging the victim to rest in Jesus’s loving arms, not condemnation of any kind, is the godly response to their despair.
Advocates can list story after story of the survivors of abuse testifying to the shame that have been heaped upon them. They have been trained by their abusers, particularly if their abuser was a Christian leader, to think of themselves as unworthy of Jesus’s love and affection.
You do not criticize them for feeling cursed or angry at God. You share with them the love that God has for them . . . telling them over and over they are a child of the Heavenly Father, the Ruler of Heaven and Earth.
Those are two very different things. One is heaping more shame on them for feeling the way they do: How dare you feel that way. One is sharing the reason they need have no shame.
Consider it Joy! Yes, the Bible tells me so. But there is a time for weeping for and mourning what is lost. There is time for the Lord to make Himself known and felt by victims of abusive leadership.
Mind you, we knew we were called to our life there. But, how we got there was nearly miraculous.
It was on our early, cool morning walk in September of 2002 when my wife cut through the maze of all my struggles and fears and prayed, “God, show us what you want us to do.” A mission work to Austria we founded been started and was floundering. I was frustrated with God’s planning. What was God doing in a work that I believed to be valuable to Him?
My wife wanted the Lord to show us whereHe wanted us to be.
I wanted Him to get us to Austria.
I thought I had a great idea for the use of my gifts in short-term missions and I wanted the Lord to go along with it. I wanted the Lord to fix the Austria mission and my wife sought God’s guidance in a much bigger way.
Neither of us had any idea God’s answer would be sending us to the continent of Africa.
Thus begins the story of To Africa On a Lark. The book was written to be a readable primer for those preparing to cross-cultures on the mission field. It is not a text but a story of God’s gradual unfolding of his purposes for the Dehnert family. Through their life in Malawi, Africa the Dehnert family learned what it meant to bring a razor to open the presents that their Malawian hosts offered them.
Book by the Editor of The Pearls and Swine Site
Kelly Dehnert, Editor of Pearls and Swine, has written a book about his family’s life in Africa as missionaries. The book provides helpful insights to engaging other cultures.
What others say about the book:
[To Africa On a Lark] is extremely readable, with an easy to follow flow. The stories are quite engaging…The overall theme of cross-cultural adjustment, with the “razor” image, comes through clearly. I hope that many will read, enjoy, and benefit from your engaging string of accounts.
J. Nelson Jennings, PhD – Editor, Global Missiology – English
What a wonderful book! You have beautifully combined storytelling of your and your family’s journey and experiences with scripture, spiritual experiences, music, and observations of Malawian and Western cultures. It is a great reference for anyone working and living in Malawi or those who support programs in Malawi.
Jeanine Jackson – Former United States Ambassador to Malawi, State Department Leadership Consultant
Historians study something called ‘movement’ — how one people group becomes a different people group simply by moving into another people group. The Dehnert tribe is a perfect microcosm of ‘movement’ – and we are all better for it. This book would be helpful for anyone considering cross-cultural service. For everyone else, especially we ‘experts,’ this book is a helpful lesson in humility – learning again the limits of our learning!
Rev. Sam McDonald – Pastor, Faith Presbyterian – Brookhaven, Mississippi and Former Missionary to Malawi
Any time we minister and work in a cross-cultural context —in our churches, communities, or overseas — we have to be aware of the biases and prejudices we bring with us. Very often, almost always, we are blind to them and they keep us from sensing, learning, growing and serving because of our own pride and arrogance that we do not even know are there.
I think [To Africa On a Lark] would be helpful to anyone considering any type of meaningful engagement in a cross-cultural setting. Missions committees would benefit by the “insider perspective” it offers and could help them be more wise and thoughtful in the works they support and encourage. Also, anyone thinking about being called to missions would benefit by reading this.
Brian Carlisle – Former Headmaster and Missionary, ABCCA – Malawi, Africa
What should be second nature to Christian organizations has, in some ways, been purloined by business leadership.
Teamwork.
In the course of studying toxic leadership, I have read numerous books on business leadership that helpfully describe a positive and productive work environment. I have also interviewed many Christian organization employees and leaders who have suffered under leaders who have no interest in teamwork.
Business gurus identify various means of creating a respectful and engaging office that gets the best out of the employees. Amy Edmondson, in her excellent work, Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy, has many valuable things to say. I would like to take her extensive research and knowledge and place it in a biblical context.
Because that is where it belongs.
Command-and-Control
Edmondson notes near the beginning of her book, “Many organizations still rely on the top-down, command-and-control approaches that fueled growth and profitability in the industrial era.” [Edmondson: Kindle 267-268] Henry Ford’s “command-and-control” leadership worked at the time only because employees were treated as cogs in the machinery of industry. They repeated activities over and over and ran as fast as possible on a mindless wheel of production.
However, business leadership writers are seeking a brighter future for the workforce.
Teaming blends relating to people, listening to other points of view, coordinating actions, and making shared decisions.
[pages 278-279]
Edmondson’s list of teaming characteristics can give hope to Christian organizations wishing to lead their organizations to a place of flourishing. In a toxic organization or one ruled by a toxic leader, these four elements of a positive work environment are often non-existent.
When the IT director and I proposed a digital solution to the problem of printer use in my Christian mission college’s computer lab, the President of the college called me into his office. His wife, the lab’s director, had already explained to me that I was to “keep my nose out of her typing lab.” The President reiterated his wife’s nastiness and proceeded to make clear I had nothing of value to be considered.
Relationships in these organizations are usually deeply fractured. The autocrat has no interest in listening to other points of view. “Coordination” means an employee is told what to do and when to do it. And, there is no discussion or attempted agreement on decisions.
Fear and Control
To be fair, some leaders just haven’t gotten the memo and have little experience in developing these leadership skills. What they have experienced, their personality traits, and what they learned from others are more Henry Ford than a team leader.
On the other hand, some leaders “believe (most of the time, erroneously) that fear increases control. Control reinforces certainty and predictability.” [Edmondson, 508-509] An autocratic, toxic leader knows exactly what he is doing and will use fear to control all things organizational. Unfortunately, “When leaders fall into a default ‘do it my way’ management style, it silences nearly everyone except the person with the loudest voice or the largest office. [Edmondson, 1217-1219] And, a toxic leader always has the loudest voice and largest office.
If you are a leader who wants the most out of her employees, the Bible and Edmondson have much to say.
Gleaning from the Image-Bearer
Edmondson says, “When leaders explicitly communicate that they respect employees, it makes it easier for employees to volunteer their knowledge.” [Edmondson, 1233-1234] Christian organizations should want the knowledge present in their employees. God has created every man (and woman) as an image-bearer. That means they represent God and take after Him in various ways.
We are fools if we do not want to glean all we can from the database of skills and knowledge stored in our employees. The Lord said as much to Moses:
Then the Lord said to Moses, “Gather for me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be the elders of the people and officers over them, and bring them to the tent of meeting, and let them take their stand there with you. And I will come down and talk with you there. And I will take some of the Spirit that is on you and put it on them, and they shall bear the burden of the people with you, so that you may not bear it yourself alone.
Numbers 11:16-17 (ESV)
God provided for his image-bearing servants the Holy Spirit that they were of help to Moses. They were to judge the people. Moses was going to be worn out trying to deal with all his office, as the head-honcho prophet of Israel, was throwing at him. God said, “I will come down and supply other men to help.”
We need to trust that the Lord does that with our employees as well.
Similarly, the Apostle Paul exhorted the Corinthian church to recognize the value of every member of the church. This lesson can easily be transferred to a Christian organization.
“For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, ‘Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,’ that would not make it any less a part of the body.”
1 Corinthians 12:14-15 (ESV)
The Lord has, in His purposeful way, provided subordinates for the good of the organization. They need to be treated as gifts rather than objects of control and abjection. The various members of our team should be treated as of equal value to our ministry.
So, how do we use employees of our organization as gifts?
Psychological Safety
We create psychological safety. This kind of environment is safe for relationships to flourish. In this kind of environment employees and bosses listen to other points of view. In this kind of environment, there is a cooperative effort to reach a goal and there is a sharing of decision making.
“When a leader of a team is supportive, coaching oriented, and nondefensive in response to questions and challenges, team members are likely to feel that the team constitutes a safe environment.”
[Edmondson, 2473-2475]
Leaders and fellow workers must respond to one another without jealousy or arrogance. They cannot act in a way that shuts down the free flow of ideas and suggestions. Trust has to be developed that ideas are welcomed and considered without harsh judgment. And, if that environment of trust is built then more challenging conversations can take place.
“Simply put, psychological safety makes it possible to give tough feedback and have difficult conversations without the need to tiptoe around the truth.” [Edmondson, 2151-2152]
When employees are psychologically safe, they do not fear broken relationships or getting fired when they disagree or present difficult ideas. There is respect and trust between members of the team. There is no jealousy.
“This belief comes about when people both trust and respect each other, and it produces a sense of confidence that the group won’t embarrass, reject, or punish someone for speaking up.”
[Edmondson, 2153-2155]
Jealousy and Gifts
One day the Lord spoke to Moses and He put His Spirit on seventy elders of Israel. The seventy prophesied, giving evidence of the blessing God had given them. They did not prophesy long. However, two men who had not gone to the tent of meeting continued prophesying in the camp. A young man, knowing the normal response of leaders to be jealousy of the successes of their subordinates, came running to Moses. He breathlessly explained to Moses the two men were prophesying.
Joshua, overhearing this exchange, was perturbed and told Moses to stop the men. He feared for Moses’ authority.
“But Moses said to him, ‘Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the Lord’s people were prophets, that the Lord would put his Spirit on them!’”
Numbers 11:24-30 (ESV)
Moses saw the great value in the grace of God being shared with other leaders besides himself. Joshua, one of the greatest leaders of Israel, likely learned an important lesson from Moses.
Subordinates must have the freedom to share their skills and knowledge.
Not Just Allowing Gifts
It is not enough, though to simply allow others to use their abilities. It is the leader’s responsibility to help those under their care to develop their abilities. Paul commands church leaders “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ…” [Ephesians 4:11-12 (ESV)] Help them grow their ministry skills, not by criticism but by encouragement. Fan their gifts to a flame.
As if taking her cue from Paul, Edmondson finishes saying, “The most successful leaders in the future will be those who have the ability to develop the talents of others.” [5043-5044]
All of this could just be a lot of law-keeping for organization heads who have no love for others.
Gospel Heart
So, having said all that has been said about building a team, I must hasten to add that real teamwork will come from the heart of man. If the leader simply follows some nice guidelines, such as the ones given by Edmondson, but miss the heart of the Gospel, it will all just be a fake.
Jesus always gets to the heart. If a leader doesn’t respect his subordinates. If the employees despise the boss. It will just be a whole lot of acting as a team but not truly functioning that way. It is imperative that the team develop an inner attitude of sharing, caring, and respect. If I put on a facade of respect for my subordinates or co-workers, they will know. It must go to my heart.
Unfortunately, the inner man is desperately foul. It takes a supernatural work of God to help us see our blind spots and respect the image of God in others. So, humbly ask for it. Realize you need it and plead with God for the mercy to see your employees as a gift.
And build a team for God’s glory.
Book by Editor of P&S
Kelly Dehnert, Editor of Pearls and Swine, has written a book about his family’s life in Africa as missionaries. The book provides helpful insights to engaging other cultures.
What others say about the book:
[To Africa On a Lark] is extremely readable, with an easy to follow flow. The stories are quite engaging…The overall theme of cross-cultural adjustment, with the “razor” image, comes through clearly. I hope that many will read, enjoy, and benefit from your engaging string of accounts.
J. Nelson Jennings, PhD – Editor, Global Missiology – English
References
Edmondson, Amy C. Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy. 1st ed. Kindle Version. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2012.
ESV New Classic Reference Bible. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2011.
Dave Marks’ father enrolled him in boxing lessons so “real boxers had a real person to hit instead of a punching bag.”
Dr. Marks wrote a short and helpful blog several years ago on conflict management [see here]. Despite the crazy dad, Dave’s thoughts are helpful for understanding the toxic work environment…or really, any conflict.
He used the boxing analogy to explain that he loved the corner of the ring that he went to when the 90-second round was finished. It was “safe” there. It was where he got to go when done getting pummeled. But the great value of Marks’ blog is in pointing out the underlying causes of how we react in conflictual relationships.
The go-to “corners” of the ring in conflict, as explained by Marks, are “relationships” and “personal needs.” He asks which we value most? The answer will determine in which corner we seek safety when the going gets tough…and, in my analysis, will determine the toxicity of the environment.
The Corners
As applied to leadership, those who seek to meet only their own perceived needs or only relationships will be toxic or useless. They will either be abusive or so passive they do not lead.
Print copies available for pre-order — to be released in March 2027
The one who is focused on relationships to the exclusion of their personal needs (or the needs of the organization) will be run over by those he (or she) is charged with leading. It may be that the organization needs a particular project to be completed. If the leader is bending to every personal request of his subordinates, the job fails to be accomplished. Marks notes that he will likely withdraw to save the relationship from conflict.
The leader becomes ineffectual.
However, a leader who is intently focused on his own needs (or the organization’s) and could give a hoot about his relationships with his subordinates, is likely to be authoritarian, abusive, easily angered, and controlling. If his relationships mean nothing, it is his own perceived needs that need satisfying. He must control and manipulate others in order to get what he desires.
He will be toxic.
Bad News
Each of these ineffectual leadership qualities can – and usually do, according to management researchers – create chaos in the workplace.[see blog]
Marks nails it on the head in suggesting that a true balance of valuing relationships and valuing personal / organizational needs will provide a safe corner in conflict…as designated on his chart in the upper right corner (“resolve”).
The one who balances these two extremes will have a resolve to bring order out of the chaos of conflict. They will work with the person they are leading and in so doing, will make the goal of their work clear and attainable. The leader will not fear the response of the subordinate but know clearly where they need to go.
The subordinate will know they are valued and will seek to fulfill the mission of the leader (or organization).
From Dave Marks’ blog on “How to Resolve Conflict”
Both Christian and non-Christian researchers have come to variations of this conclusion. The ground-breaking work of Edwin Friedman in “A Failure of Nerve” provides a glimpse into the toxic environments developed by those who are so focused on their own emotional needs, they run roughshod over their co-workers or subordinates.
These leaders often become so self-focused they place their own goals over everthing else and will manipulate and abuse anyone who stands in the way.
On the other hand, he also takes to task those who are part of the “herd.” These are the ones who are so concerned about relationships that they create emotional dependency or allow toxic individuals (who do not care about relationships), whether leader or subordinate, to rule the roost.
As I have written before, Herrington, Creech, and Taylor have taken Friedman’s research and noted the biblical connections. They point to Jesus Christ as the ultimate “self-differentiated” one as he stays connected in relationships and yet gets the job done. He relates perfectly, knowing the needs of those he engages, and yet always knows his mission and goals.
Lessons from the Boxing Ring
It is the perfect balance we all seek in our Christian leadership.
Ronald Enroth, an authority on cults, writes,
Spiritually abusive groups routinely use guilt, fear, and intimidation as effective means for controlling their members. In my opinion, the leaders consciously foster an unhealthy form of dependency, spiritually and interpersonally, by focusing on themes of submission, loyalty, and obedience to those in authority. In all totalitarian environments, dependency is necessary for subjugation.
We need to take the warning Enroth lays before us. These cultish leaders focus on their own needs and manipulate the relationships. They do not truly care about relationships and their subordinates have allowed themselves to become dependent on their authority. I have seen it in mission organizations, churches, and politics.
We need to remain engaged in relationships and recognize our own needs and the needs of our organizations. When a leader refuses to seek that balance, the organization is headed the wrong way.
It will not go well for the mission of the organization nor for the subordinates.
To Africa On a Lark: A Visitor Brings a Sharp Razor
Kelly Dehnert, Editor of Pearls and Swine, has written a book about his family’s life in Africa as missionaries. The book provides helpful insights to engaging other cultures.
[To Africa On a Lark] is extremely readable, with an easy to follow flow. The stories are quite engaging…The overall theme of cross-cultural adjustment, with the “razor” image, comes through clearly. I hope that many will read, enjoy, and benefit from your engaging string of accounts.
J. Nelson Jennings, PhD – Editor, Global Missiology – English
It all started so well. A good looking and humble guy.
The first book of Kings describes King Solomon as a godly man. He “loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of David his father.”
And if that wasn’t clear enough, when asked by the Lord what his desire was, his response was to ask for wisdom to rule Israel. He humbly admitted that he was “but a little child.” He confessed that he was not adequate on his own to govern God’s people.
What a start.
Dependence
Leadership in God’s kingdom must fundamentally be about dependence on the Lord to gift and guide. Those who lead must be built to lead and then they must be directed. That building of leadership qualities and guidance are from Jesus Christ.
Though a leader may not be born, all that he has has been given by the Lord. His abilities. His material wealth. His opportunities. So, whether a leader becomes a leader after the hard work of study and practice or was a leader since birth, it all comes from the Lord.
It was said of Solomon:
And the whole earth sought the presence of Solomon to hear his wisdom, which God had put into his mind.
1 Kings 10:24 (ESV)
God had put into his mind all the wisdom he had. It all came from the Lord.
Therefore, the acknowledging of God’s gifting and help are essential to a good leader. Because God expects him to acknowledge God’s gifts to him.
…giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ…
Ephesians 5:20 (ESV)
And, it is by God’s guidance that the leader leads. God has given scripture (special revelation) and a world of wisdom (general revelation).
The good leader is dependent on the Lord for His guidance by His Holy Spirit enlightening the Words of scripture. He studies to know God’s Word as the kings of old were commanded:
“And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statutes, and doing them, that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, either to the right hand or to the left, so that he may continue long in his kingdom, he and his children, in Israel.”
Deuteronomy 17:18-20 (ESV)
God’s leaders need to be immersed in God’s Word. That is a tall order and an order that Solomon seemed to understand.
And God’s leaders must also be wise to God’s “general” revelation. God has set in course rules of nature that may be studied and applied to act wisely in this life. That which is not clearly contained in His Word may yet be His means of directing a leader in wisdom.
Being a good engineer is founded upon studying God’s established physical universe. Working with the minds of men depends on understanding both the spiritual and physical complexities of his brain. So, the good leader studies God’s world to know with wisdom how to respond to the needs of his stake-holders.
Solomon astounded the people by his wisdom, in one case shocking his attendants by suggesting a baby be cut in half to determine who the correct mother was. He did not know how to do that by God’s law but by the Holy Spirit enlightening him to the events playing out before him.
All Good Things…
But the typical happened. And, it is a lesson for leaders everywhere.
Scripture says Solomon was wiser than anyone around. He was an exceptional leader and blessings of a material nature clearly followed him. Everything he touched, it seems, turned to gold.
And yet, he did what so many leaders do after starting well.
After building a beautiful temple for the worship of the Lord, at God’s direction, Solomon was turned. In his arrogance and power he married any woman he wished and used his subjects for his own ends.
The law expressly forbid marrying women not of Israel. Not out of spite or arrogance but because, as scripture explains, “You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods.” [1 Kings 11:2b]
And, he had a boatload of them. 700 wives and 300 concubines. Good grief.
Solomon also made a house…for Pharaoh’s daughter whom he had taken in marriage. All these were made of costly stones…
And, scripture says they turned him away to other gods. After building a magnificent sanctuary for the worship of the one true God, he built places of worship [high places] for several other gods. Abomidable gods it says.
Art Thou the Man?
Are you going to be turned?
After being given opportunity to lead and being overwhelmed by the responsibility, were you humbled? Did you see it as a gift from the Lord to be given that great privilege of leading? Did you fall on your face before the Lord asking Him for wisdom to lead?
Great start.
Now, consider how far you can fall.
God was gracious to Solomon in leaving him in charge until he died (with rough spots along the way). But the Lord explained that Solomon’s legacy would be in rags. After such a great start, the Lord is said to be angry with Solomon.
Solomon’s legacy was the split of God’s people (Israel and Judah). They followed separate leaders and Israel especially followed Solomon’s example. The northern tribes (Israel) chose their own place of worship and ended up falling to conquerors (sooner than Judah).
It was a disappointing end for a thrilling start.
To Africa on a Lark by the Editor of Pearls and Swine Site
Kelly Dehnert, Editor of Pearls and Swine, has written a book about his family’s life in Africa as missionaries. The book provides helpful insights to engaging other cultures.
[To Africa On a Lark] is extremely readable, with an easy to follow flow. The stories are quite engaging…The overall theme of cross-cultural adjustment, with the “razor” image, comes through clearly. I hope that many will read, enjoy, and benefit from your engaging string of accounts.
J. Nelson Jennings, PhD – Editor, Global Missiology – English
One of the occupational hazards of someone who studies and writes about abuse is an ever-present vigilance – often overdeveloped. I am very attentive to leadership failure. I can find it under every rock.
But I guess that is my job so others can think about other things maybe more productive.
Let me share some of those rocks under which I have found toxic leaders in my various interviews and experience. There are a number of indicators of abusive leadership and it is important to be able to diagnose toxic leadership and root it out from your organization.
Because it is nearly guaranteed toxic leaders will kill your organization if left unchecked.
The List
This is meant as a simple list and it is not conclusive. But it can give you something to consider if you are wondering if you serve a toxic leader:
1. Lack of Humility
Recently, a blogger listed the various evangelical leaders who have fallen by the way-side. He noted that each one lacked humility. “He cannot be wrong.” This is my warning to survivors of domestic violence or leadership abuse: run from those who do not have the humility to admit they are wrong. They are wrong at times no matter how often they tell you someone else is wrong.
2. Focus on Control
From micro-managing to mind-control, leaders who abuse God-given authority want to control everything. In Christian organizations control is often hidden behind the “Christianese” of despising gossip. As one ministry under-shepherd said, “He had to control the narrative.” One Christian business leader (of whom I have heard testimonies) makes it his biggest priority to root out gossip from the organization.
Sounds good.
The Lord speaks against gossip. But his hatred of gossip is in one direction. He is entitled to be free from being challenged for wrongdoing. If someone goes to him directly they are either torn apart (Matthew 7) or their complaint is ignored. Where do you go from there?
Wherever you go, it is then considered gossip by these authoritarians.
3. He is the Center
Closely related to number one is the leader who always takes the credit. Rarely is the leader really the reason something got done. Maybe he directed as a good leader should. Maybe it was his idea.
But it is usually the minions who are doing the hard lifting. The abusive leader makes it very clear he is the center of all that is good in the organization. We all want praise but these leaders are seemingly driven by little else.
And, watch out if they do not get it.
4. Blame-Shifter
Closely related to the first and second is the leader who deflects criticism by sending you in another direction. Someone else must be wrong if the leader is always right. Right? Often they create the environment that there has to be a fall-guy. There must be someone else to blame.
Often blame-shifting comes out when the leader talks about the large percentage of resignations from the organization. “They just weren’t supportive of our mission…They just couldn’t handle the hard work…They just couldn’t handle Africa…”
You might want to actually talk to some of those people to get the real story.
5. No Team is a Good Team
As a musician friend of mine noted not long ago, the conductor’s job is to help the orchestra (or choir or band) use their talents to the best of their ability to serve the audience. It is not his job to create a cult of self. The focus should never be on the conductor.
Good leaders build teams that help each other multiply their effectiveness by enjoying and using one another’s giftedness. Toxic leaders are (back to number 2) the center of their universe. And they want to be the center of yours as well.
6. Image, Image, Image
In our day of marketing genius, this may be a bit harder to get. We want to get our ministries out there so we let people know what we do well; that can include some pretty professional marketing. But those who have been part of a mission organization that practiced this will understand.
One Christian psychologist put it this way:
I often think of a narcissistic pastor who served in a rural setting in a very small church, who by all accounts was diligent and godly but who constantly compared his church to other churches with an attitude of judgment, lauding his church’s orthodoxy while quietly condemning other local pastors. 1
There are many mission groups or organizations out there that are doing God-glorifying work. When a leader is constantly comparing his ministry to others and touting that his organization is the very best, there is a problem going back to number 1.
In fact, maybe he believes his organization is the only one doing the work of God. It is ego-gratifying and it will eat you alive. And it fails to recognize the big team of God that is out there seeking to do His work.
7. Sweetness & Hurt
Not all toxic leaders practice this bizarre behavior but it is extremely confusing to those who do not recognize abuse. One moment the leader will go off on a subordinate, tearing him to pieces . . . the next they are sweetness and light. And usually with no acknowledgement that anything happened at all.
This is an indicator of “borderline” personality disorder. It is manipulative and destructive.
8. Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire
It is really hard for most employees or church members to believe: There are “Christian” leaders out there that lie through their teeth.
It took several years for us to finally realize that our mission leader was intentionally lying to us. We gave all sorts of justifications for his failure to “remember” what he had told us before. We even calmed others with justifications when they pointed out his lies to them. But it finally came down to him covering his own entitled self with lies.
This is not normal behavior!
Run or Confront?
So, those are some indicators of toxic leadership. If your boss is practicing these, have another vocation waiting in the wings and send out that memo. You can run or confront.
If you want to see repentance, your leader will need to be seriously challenged. They do not change through soft-pedling their wrongs. If you care for the organization and the work it is doing, help the organization root out the toxic leader.
