In this second look at the book of James, we will consider the center of toxic leadership. As was noted in part one of this series, much teaching in leadership circles looks at the outward behavior of the leader as the standard.
I have had the pleasure and privilege of writing alongside academic researchers in the field of toxic leadership—not because I am particularly an academic mind you—and have noticed this particular bent. I understand it and am not opposed to what is being written. Just as the US military takes a decidedly behavioral perspective in its training and discipline (as a friend told me), so too I know in the business world it is more feasible to look at the outward actions of leaders. There is the view that as long as you keep your toxins inside, you are golden as a leader.
However, as a Christian writing mostly to those confronted by toxic leadership in Christian organizations—including the church—I am concerned about leaders who may get a free pass because their toxins are covered up—at least for a time.
And that is a very important point; I believe toxic leadership will [nearly] always raise its ugly head at some point if the leader has a heart that is bent that way.
And so, this blog is looking at what James says about the heart. Because it is getting to the beast within that is going to truly and actually impact the toxic leader’s behavior and help in bringing accountability.
James says in 3:13:
Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.
Notice the interesting interplay here. James first points to the heart: “wise and understanding”. Those are heart issues—the inner man. What does he think and feel. Is he “wise and understanding?”
Then he goes on to note that behavior should come from wisdom and understanding. His good conduct will show whether he is wise or not. His behavior will show what is in his heart.
Then James goes on to explain more:
But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth. 15 This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.
When toxic leaders are described, it is usually with terms like arrogance, liar, entitled, controlling, harsh, and overly demanding.
James goes so far as to say that these heart attitudes—jealousy, selfish ambition—are demonic. That is strong stuff. And not only that, these attitudes give rise to “disorder and every vile practice.”
It comes from the inner man.
If the thinking, emotions, and will are evil then the behavior will be. It may be controlled sometimes out of necessity to keep the job or wife or the respect of others. But the evil will in the end get the best of the most self-controlled of leaders and there will be disorder and vile practices.
Where does oppressive behavior come from? It comes from the heart of man.
Therefore all attempts at coaching or counseling must be directed to the heart of man. It is not enough to give him a nicer suit or less angry words. You can’t dress him up from the outside.
The book of James in the Bible is full of teaching on the abusive heart.
Though it speaks generally to all people, it also has specific value for leaders—those with formal or informal power over others.
After providing a beautiful and life-changing discussion on how to persevere under trials, James begins to delve into the heart of oppressive behavior. The warning shot comes in verse 19 of the first chapter:
Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; 20 for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God.
“Angry” is often a descriptive term for those who are abusive of others. Though anger is not normally at the heart of the abusive leader’s problem—rather entitlement and control—it is a means and method for achieving these desires of the abuser.
This one sentence written by James, the brother of Jesus Christ, is antithetical to anger.
Listen.
Wait.
Be right.
A leader who fails to listen to others is not producing “the righteousness of God.” He has his own views, rights, and privileges in mind, not the good of others or the organization he serves. Listening to others implies truly hearing what they have to say and giving them the respect they deserve as God’s image bearers.
This can be applied as well to the leader who seemingly listens to and yet ignores his subordinates. The term “hear” means “to attend to, consider what is or has been said.” Again, is he giving honor to those who serve at his behest? Hearing means truly listening . . . no just acting like it.
Hypocrisy
James goes on in this same passage to challenge those who are wrapped up in a “Christiany” image but are in fact hypocrites. They put on an act of being Christian by spouting biblical sounding speeches, but in fact do not actually live those same words in their daily lives and leadership:
But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. 24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. [James 1:22-24]
These “Christian” leaders appear to hear the words of God but immediately turn away from them in their daily life. They are surrounded by the Word of God—in the organization masthead, organization chapels, staff meetings, church partnering—but it is all just window-dressing. Often the leader is more concerned about funding the organization than he is about following Christ “whether he eats or drinks, or whatever he does.”
So, he speaks a good line that sounds Christian for all the donors and likely the staff, but his heart is really far from it.
Out of the Mouth
In verse 26, James brings the tongue back into the discussion:
If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.
James takes a hard stance against the evil that comes out of the mouth. It comes back over and over again.
Much of our “behavior” —outward actions—is how we speak to and about others. Just as James says, our tongues are fires (James 3:5), ready to accomplish our scorched earth policies.
Does the leader think of himself, and even defend himself as a good Christian? Does he see himself as religious—after all, he runs a Christian organization or goes to church regularly, maybe even is a Sunday school teacher, or fills the pulpit periodically.
James says, if he “does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless.“
In chapter three James goes on with further criticism of those who use the tongue abusively:
For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, 8 but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. 10 From the same mouth come blessing and cursing.
Deadly Poison
“Deadly poison.” Strong words. James shows the incomprehensibility of those who claim to love Christ and yet “curse” others. The Greek term καταράομαι (curse) means to “curse, doom, imprecate evil upon” someone else.
As poison it hurts and kills. Though sticks and stones can break our bones, cursing others is murderous. It destroys the emotional and spiritual health of others. It often destroys other’s relationship with the Lord having come from a “Christian” leader.
James, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, gets the harm abusive words cause.
The hypocrisy of those who lead a Christian organizations—or any other organization for that matter—claiming to be a follower of Christ and yet behaving with a pattern of abusive language is beyond comprehension.
Appropriately, James has the strongest words for those who tear down others with their words—words that should give life and hope to others.
Do you take seriously the words that come from your mouth. Do you stop. Listen. And then respectfully hear the words of those under your formal or informal authority? If you continually justify yourself, you need to delve deeper into your heart.
Abusive leadership is a pattern of behavior that tears down others and it is so often with words—even words that sound Christian.
In this little missive I am going to try to relate an interesting, but understandable, phenomenon in domestic abuse experience to the workaday world.
I have heard more than once from friends of survivors that the abuser is “not as bad as my husband . . . so he’s golden!”
We can’t help but contrast and compare our experiences with other’s. We either do so to build ourselves up or show how rough we have it. Either way, one comes out smelling better than another.
Well at least he doesn’t hit her
In the domestic violence world it is common to hear, “Well at least he doesn’t hit her.” But survivors of emotional abuse will come back with, “I wish he would hit me so I would have a bruise to show for it. Then maybe others would take my suffering seriously.”
Many people fail to recognize or make clear that any form of abuse is wrong. It is hurtful to the emotional, physical, and spiritual health of the victim. The pain of bruises and the agony of broken brain circuitry are simply different . . . but all of it is destructive and evil and can create long-term trauma.
So, that brings us to another problem: the isolating of victims because people don’t understand these truths. These comparisons are used to control the victims, particularly in Christian settings where divorce is rejected on abuse grounds.
I have heard things like, “When they don’t destroy things they must be gold . . . though they yell at and demean their partner.” Friends of one woman repeatedly attacked her because her husband isn’t “as bad as their own.” They will not admit that their own husbands are abusive. That would be too hard. So the victim is pushed outside the camp because she isn’t tough enough like her detractors are.
But, as my wife has said, “You don’t have to be strangling someone to choke the life out of them.” Though he may not yell as often or demean in the same way, it is evil.
Workplace Abuse?
How does this relate to leadership in the workplace?
We see the same dynamic in the organization when fellow leaders, boards, or even co-workers suggest that the boss—
Isn’t as bad as the last guy.
The boss is supposed to be a strong leader.
He may be a little rough around the edges.
He is the founder. He can do what he wants.
Corporate bosses are notoriously narcissistic.
All these excuses simply suggest that evil is good.
But Scripture does not take that view.
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Isaiah 5:20 (ESV)
Notice how that verse starts: “Woe”. That is a scary word that has a sense of “curse”. You do not want to be “woed”. But when you start suggesting that someone is not abusive in the home or workplace because he isn’t as bad as Hitler, you need to rethink your comparisons. You are asking for woes.
Particularly if you are being called on to give aid and comfort to a victim. And instead, you suggest their pain means nothing.
The abuse of leadership does not just appear out of the blue.
It has roots and a heart.
When we talk about abuse, we talk about patterns of behavior—coercive, controlling, and punishing behaviors. But we do not stop there.
The Difficulty of Transformation
It is rooted deeply in the heart. Behaviors are simple outward manifestations of something much deeper.
Therefore, the way to transformation is through the heart; not a five-, ten-, or fifteen-step program of changed behavior.
When seeking change in an abusive leader, it must be kept in mind that he or she is deeply deceived.
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?
Jeremiah 17:9 (ESV)
And this is why abuse advocates have so little confidence in the abusive leader to change.
Have you ever confronted an abuser? Did you see a humble recognition of their wicked heart? Did you see the dawning light in their eyes as they recognized their controlling heart and mean spirit? Did they even two days later come back to you and confess their thoughts of control and domination and ask forgiveness?
I know the answer to those rhetorical questions. At least 99% of the time.
Moral Concern for Others
So, how can transformation take place? How can an abusive leader be changed?
In a recent article by Kevin Brown in “The Dispatch“, the writer hit the nail on the head. Change is not through “thinly constituted reasoning”, as Brown puts it, but through “a story that shapes our moral imagination and directs our lives toward others.”
Brown says,
The Christian tradition has a word for this: discipleship. A call not merely to know what is right, but to become the kind of people who do the right thing. That is, both a desire for the good and the capacity to carry it out.
He noted that change in mankind—for good—comes through “discipleship”.
Brown says,
It is our day-to-day roots, not abstract reason, that will cultivate the virtuous life and our moral concern for others.
But discipleship means there is a “follower” who desires to learn from the one discipling him. And this again can be a nail in the coffin of transformation—most abusers don’t see it and so don’t think they need transformation. Why would they seek out discipleship?
The Ultimate Transformer
This is where Christ comes in . . . though He has been there all the time, mind you.
If Christ resurrected, this changes everything. All the maps have been redrawn. The world is upside down. Things are not as they seem. The truth of this story demands, says the hymnist, “my soul, my life, my all.”
It is only through Christ that a leader can even develop the desire to seek to know oneself; to know the sin that lies deeply hidden in his soul. To become a disciple.
This is the ultimate way that a leader will change his spots.
Yes, there are ways of seeking accountability: bringing pressure from boards; confrontations; firings; required batterer intervention programs. We have seen leaders seek heart change as a result of these accountability measures.
But ultimately, these only work when Christ chooses to bring pressure, confront, and bring consequences in order to discipline the toxic leader.
For if, because of [Adam’s] trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
Romans 5:17 (ESV)
We must rely upon Christ. Ultimately, transformation is His gift from Jesus Christ to the leader and organization and even the world around the leader.
Blessed is the man whom you discipline, O LORD, and whom you teach out of your law.
Ted’s story is hard to even start the telling. His story is a call to the church to be the church.
The brokenness of leadership in his denomination is so overwhelming that you begin to wonder if there is any real church left. Jesus’ church is redeemed and beautiful to Him, yet she so often acts as if she would have nothing to do with Him.
Jesus surely loves His bride, but at times I find that surprising.
Ted’s Story
It began several years ago when a committee was formed in Ted’s denomination’s regional leadership to investigate charges of sexual harassment against one of the pastors.
The committee, that acts a bit like a Grand Jury in the regional grouping of churches, presented a one-page summation of their investigation. They said they found no reason to move towards a trial as there were no strong reasons to suggest the pastor was guilty.
Ted found it strange that the summation said there was no guilt, but the committee provided “pastoral corrections” in the summation due to his “sexual misconduct.” He thought, “If there is no guilt, why would there be corrections to be made in his ministry?”
Ted and others asked for the full report—which was four pages long—but were refused. However, they discovered there had been one woman who acted as an “advisor” to the committee and she had published a “minority opinion.”
That sounded suspicious.
Ted began to speak with others, including women who were connected in some way to the case. In time, he determined he should stand up and be counted, filing a complaint with the regional leadership seeking justice for the women (multiple) who had reported the sexual misconduct.
In addition, he found that there had been multiple reports of impropriety against the pastor for at least five years before.
At this point, he told his wife, Rebecca that three things were going to happen:
There was going to be a huge move to exonerate the pastor.
He would be accused of having an affair with one of the women the pastor sexually harrassed.
It would all end with Ted being charged with something.
The Pastor’s Power Play
Ted’s complaint was refused and so he took it to the “supreme court” of his denomination for a ruling. That “court” upheld his complaint and ordered that a new investigative committee be appointed by the regional leadership.
However, a group of pastors suggested that an independent organization be hired by the regional leadership to investigate the charges. If they followed through, Ted would need to drop his charges against the pastor. He willingly did so that the independent investigators would have a free hand.
However, the regional leadership allowed the acccused pastor to speak at length and he convinced the leadership that the independent organization recommended was untrustworthy. His reason? He argued that they would support the victims.
He suggested that the regional leadership investigate and if they found guilt, then hire the independent group.
The pastor then convinced the leadership to appoint an investigative committee that had two lawyers on it. Then proceeded to convince them to put two lawyers on the committee whom he thought he had wrangled into his camp over the preceeding months.
In the end, his nearly hand-chosen committee found him guilty. But his personal lawyer, from one of the biggest law firms in the state, sought and obtained an immediate cease and desist order from the civil courts and stopped the process.
Contumacy
Men in the regional leadership then suggested bringing the pastor up on charges for his refusal to heed the ruling of the committee called “contumacy” (stubborn refusal to obey or comply with authority). In the rulebook of the denomination it states that a pastor who is found to be guilty of contumacy by the denominational “courts” must repent or be excommunicated.
The pastor wrote a letter that he was amending his lawsuit against parties in the denomination but that he was “not admitting guilt.” Ted stood before the leadership and asked if this was not a clear sign he was unrepentant.
Others rose to suggest that “repentance does not always involve admitting to sin.”
Really?
Ted was livid and suggested that the regional leadership organization be disolved and that their group of churches be melded into another regional grouping of churches because he said, “We will never, ever conduct a fair trial.” He wondered what the use of their regional leadership was if they could not judge fairly.
In the end, the highest court heard the case against the pastor and found him not guilty.
One of the parties involved in the case remarked, “This is a coverup and meant to send a message to the denomination that you never challenge a pastor.”
Band of Brothers
Ted shared with me the story of Mark, a pastor who had incredible influence in the regional leadership. He described him as one of the biggest narcissists he has ever seen. Twenty to thirty people have told him Mark was spiritually abusive.
When another pastor was brought up on charges Mark stood to support him, calling it an “injustice.” Ted was talking to him a year later and asked him about the pastor he had supported. Mark said the accused pastor was one of the worst pastors he had seen. He was “super legalistic, bad with people . . . Mark went on and on,” Ted said.
Ted asked, “Why did you fight his firing?”
Mark told him, “He is a pastor. We can’t allow elders in the churches to rule.”
But, Ted pressed, “He was abusive.” Mark replied, “Oh, I don’t doubt that at all. But we have to protect the regional leadership of pastors. It is a ‘band of brothers,'” referring to the movie by that name.
Ted told me he can point to at least four other cases of charges brought against pastors where the reaction was always to defend the pastor “even when indefensible.”
What Can We Say?
Ted said he has been re-reading “To Kill a Mockingbird” and is finding that someone who seeks justice in his denomination for those under pastoral abuse experience something akin to African Americans in the 50s.
It begins to look like Jesus before the Sanhedrin where the highest Jewish court repeatedly broke their own rules due to their own bias and blindness. Finding an innocent Jesus guilty; while drowning in His blood.
Or the leaders of Israel during the time of Ezekiel when the Lord calls them to account for their wicked leadership:
The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them. So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd, and they became food for all the wild beasts. My sheep were scattered. . . Ezekiel 34:4-5 (ESV)
When the leadership of God’s people reject His unmistakeable teaching to humbly serve His children, there will be unmeasurable harm done to the Church.
Ted’s story should be a clarion call to church leadership:
Repent or suffer the fate that you so desperately are trying to stave off—the scattering of God’s people.
How in the World
I asked Ted how in the world he has stood strong in the midst of all the attacks he has faced.
Ted noted that all three of the predictions he made to Rebecca have proven true.
As noted above, there was a huge movement to protect the erring pastor.
Ted was indeed accused of having an affair with one of the women who came forward to report the pastor’s sexual misconduct—even though Ted has only actually see her and the other women who reported maybe five times.
And charges have been filed against him in the church courts that he is currently battling.
Ted told me he has found solace and strength in three things:
Ted said his wife has been amazing. She has been his support and encouragement all along.
He enjoys a cohort of other pastors and Ted said they “have been rock solid friends through it all.” They have helped him write complaints, checked in on him periodically, and prayed with him often.
He sought out a Christian counselor. At one particular point the counselor suggested two things:
Find an EMDR counselor as soon as possible. Ted said, “That has been huge.” This type of treatment for trauma has been incredibly helpful to many victims of abuse. See Bessel van der Kolk’s book here.
And surprisingly the counselor suggested he find a Brazilian jiu jitsu gym. Ted said, “It was the greatest thing I have done.” He was amazed that the others in the club were so supportive of each other. He noted, “When there is a new guy, the advanced one’s job is to help him by submitting to him in the wrestling, showing him how to win.” He added, “If you try to hurt others, you will be kicked out of the gym immediately.”
I really was amazed by Ted’s mental and spiritual health despite all he has gone through.
Quite frankly, I cannot imagine being where he is if I had suffered all he has to advocate for victims of such horrendous leadership.
One of the clear signs of toxic leadership is image management. Chuck DeGroat shares in his book, “When Narcissism Comes to the Church” what one of his clients said of her husband:
“My husband has told me that he will divorce me and publicly humiliate me if I ever say anything negative about him.”1
Image management in the home.
Even when there isn’t toxic leadership, image management in organizational management can be a temptation for churches and Christian organizations. We all want others to see us in the best light and that gets transferred to our marketing of our church or organization.
Goffman used the terms “impression management” to describe how an “actor strives to present an impression to the audience they will find agreeable.”2 Wade Mullen, in his PhD dissertation runs with Goffman’s ideas and explains how individuals and organizations present an “agreeable” impression of themselves or organization in a falsified way.
As Mullens notes, IM (Image Management) is often used unwittingly. It just comes naturally to us. Some sociologists have argued it is a learned trait and as Christians we can easily argue it is a trait present since the fall of man—if we are talking about the falsified form of IM.
When used to give a false (good) impression of who we are, it is simply a form of lying. Unfortunately, this kind of lying has become standard practice in a society that is money- and marketing-driven.
But again, it should not surprise us. We are sinful people. You can see it in the church that has become wrapped up in the marketing craze with slick media messaging and false advertising.
With that as an introduction, let’s explore how we can identify our natural—fallen—urge to make something pretty that is not. And, specifically, consider how abuse is covered up because it is most certainly NOT pretty.
The Most Common Expressions of IM
I cannot count the number of times I have seen statements like, “It will bring shame to Christ’s name.”
It is common that someone abused by either a leader, friend, or a spouse will desire (rightfully) to make known the abuse in order to bring accountability and repentance. However, a (likely) well-meaning church member or leader makes the above statement to the victim. It is assumed that the airing of dirty laundry is a bad witness to Christ.
There is one simple answer to this belief.
If this is true, the Bible is full of this “bad witness” as God tells the story of man’s failures and His redemptive plan for the ages. Without the airing of the dirty laundry there can be no forgiveness. Therreason there is forgiveness offered is because of our dirty laundry. There can be no redemption without the humble recognition of sin. We would need to read a sterilized version of the Bible if we thought that the presence and proclamation of man’s sins brings shame to Christ.
On the contrary, the humility involved in airing our dirty laundry is actually a positive witness to this redemptive work of Christ (see this for further discussion).
There is a reason God sent His Son. Jesus died in order to take away our sin and as Solomon said, “there is no one who does not sin” (2 Chronicles 6:36-39). Our sin, and particularly grievous sin like abuse of leadership (that affects so many), should be known not only for the seeking of redemption but for two other reasons.
First, it is necessary for sin to be public so that there is accountability for the abuser. He must, if he is to repent, be held accountable for his arrogance and entitlement. And secondly, others need to be warned. This is taught clearly in Scripture in 1st Timothy:
As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear.
1 Timothy 5:20 (ESV)
Paul is speaking about leaders in the church. There is warning for others when a leader has abused his authority and been called on the carpet by others.
An Arrogant Culture
Chuck DeGroat talks of “Grandiose Narcissistic Systems.” DeGroat describes a discussion he had with a friend who had inherited the leadership of a large ministry:
. . . he was alarmed by a collective narrative that went something like this: “The [rival ministry] is doing that, so we must respond by doing this.” He heard key leaders within the organization talk in disparaging ways of the other ministry, he read personal blogs of his staff that mocked other Christians while elevating their own work, and he felt what he described as a “gross arrogance” at staff meetings. He told me that staff-meeting culture felt more like game planning to beat the rival than corporately discerning God’s will for that season of ministry. He said, “It seems as if they’re all in some sort of group trance.”3
Image management develops an arrogant culture within an organization.
I cringe when I hear “there is no one else doing ministry the way we are”. You might be surprised by how often you will hear this kind of arrogance spoken in the halls of ministries.
Ministry leaders, and even followers, convince themselves of this to pump up and validate themselves. There is not a ministry out there that can honestly suggest such a thing. There is someone doing much the same thing somewhere in the world, doing it just as well or better, and has been doing it longer.
It may not be a marketing slogan the organization puts out on social media or even in their brochures but simply what is said to employees to create pride in and loyalty to the organization. But enough of it and the culture will become toxic with arrogance.
These organizations become resistant to challenge and change—after all, if they are the best, then how could there be a problem. In turn, like with the husband at the beginning of this blog, those who happen to say anything negative about the organization will be humiliated by the leaders or by pears within the organization.
Push Back
I encourage the faithful to push back against all such image management. If you hear these things when you are applying to join an organization, run. If you hear it while working for an organization, challenge it. If you read it in the fundraising appeals of your favorite charity, put your checkbook away.
Image Management has no place in the Christian organization.
Notes:
DeGroat, Chuck. When Narcissism Comes to Church: Healing Your Community From Emotional and Spiritual Abuse (p. 92). (Function). Kindle Edition. ↩︎
DeGroat, Chuck. When Narcissism Comes to Church: Healing Your Community From Emotional and Spiritual Abuse (pp. 105-106). (Function). Kindle Edition. ↩︎
The toxic leader will be threatened by the slightest show of strength from subordinates. This was the story of the new king of Egypt in the time following the death of Joseph.
As a little background, Joseph, the son of Jacob, had been taken as a slave from his family to Egypt—that is a whole story in itself. Through a variety of amazing circumstances directed by the Lord, Joseph’s ability to read the dreams of others came to the attention of the king.
Having read the king’s troubling dreams, the king appointed Joseph to oversee the nation’s food supply. The king had dreamed (symbolically) of seven years of abundance followed by a seven-year drought. God gave Joseph incredible wisdom that saved the Egyptian nation and many surrounding nations through his wise management of their agriculture.
Joseph’s family—God’s people—moved to Egypt during this time and were given good land to farm by the king. The “Israelites” grew in numbers and after Joseph died, Exodus 1:8-11 picks up the story:
Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph. 9 And he said to his people, “Behold, the people of Israel are too many and too mighty for us. 10 Come, let us deal shrewdly with them, lest they multiply, and, if war breaks out, they join our enemies and fight against us and escape from the land.” 11 Therefore they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with heavy burdens. They built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and Raamses.
Exodus 1:8-11 (ESV)
You have to the ask the question, “Why would the king think the Israelites would join Egypt’s enemies and fight against them?” Egypt had proven to be a good place to work and raise their families. The Israelites were prospering because of the former Pharoah’s (king) kindness to them.
Why, Why, Why
However, it appears that the Israelites were already in the grips of the Egyptians. They did not appear to be equals in their citizenry. The king (and the other Egyptians) appeared to have power over these foreign people. This is evidenced by the fact the king could set “taskmasters over them to afflict them with heavy burdens.”
This new Pharaoh would prove in the story to be a toxic leader.
The Egyptian king had the ability to rule over them in a toxic way and chose to do so. So, he chose to take toxic control. An average leader might consider how to woo his subordinates. Not the Egyptian king. . . nor a toxic leader of any sort.
Robert Hare wrote,
There is a class of individuals who have been around forever and who are found in every race, culture, society and walk of life. Everybody has met these people, been deceived and manipulated by them, and forced to live with or repair the damage they have wrought.1
If you know the story, you know that Exodus goes on to describe the destruction wrought by the king in the lives of the Egyptians and the subsequent judgments God brought upon the nation of Egypt because of the king’s horrific toxicity. As Hare notes, the Egyptians were “forced to live with or repair the damage [the king had] wrought.”
This is the way of toxic leadership. The destruction a narcissistic or abusive leader causes can be far-reaching and long-lasting. But generally, it is people in the organization, nation, business, or church that have to, in the end, live with it or try to repair it.
And it gets worse
Barbara Kellerman, the Founding Executive Director of the Harvard Kennedy School’s Center for Public Leadership, wrote of the common direction these toxic leaders go; down. It only gets worse. There is example after example. It is extremely rare that a bad leader becomes good. Rather their slippery slope is all downhill.
Kellerman tells the story of Volkswagen’s former CEO, Martin Winterkorn.
The effect of Winterkorn’s bad leadership was cumulative. The longer it lasted, the higher the cost to everyone adversely affected. Volkswagen’s cheating was not a single, quickly aborted instance of wrongdoing, never to be repeated. It was the opposite. It went on for eight years, the price paid by the victims of Volkswagen’s wrongdoing escalating with each passing day.2
But this should not surprise us as Christians. Sin is crouching at the door (Gen. 4:7) and without the intervention of Christ, it goes generally from bad to worse.
There are people who are truly driven by evil as Dan Allender describes (and it only gets worse):
All of us are capable of doing evil things, but evil people are driven by a self-interest that is so heartless, conscious, and cruel that it delights in stealing from others the lifeblood of their soul. Often the one who delights in evil is an ordinary, unassuming person who hides behind a facade of normalcy. Few people who are evil ever appear evil, even after the evidence of their deceit, destructiveness, and hardness is exposed.3
Keeping Clean of Defilement
It is difficult to watch the masses follow after narcissistic and abusive leaders in any organizational setting. They might think the leader holds some values they hold or promote some policies they promote. So, they think those positive traits will keep the followers clean of defilement. But, that is not how it works.
The followers of the Egyptian king suffered much the same from God’s judgment as did the king. The plagues that devastated Egypt crushed its people. In fact, it is likely that the only plague that fully affected the king was the death of his firstborn. As the king, he was likely above many of the affects of the other plagues.
Let this story be a challenge to leaders who are tempted to gain control through strength or manipulation. And let is be a challenge to followers who think they are somehow exempt from the damage such leaders bring.
In John 9 Jesus healed a man who was blind from birth and the religious leaders, who were deeply intimidated by Jesus, wanted to squash the Lord’s ministry. They demean both Jesus—saying he is a sinner—and the man, accusing him of following an outlier—not Moses whom they followed.
The leaders ridiculed the man by saying, “We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man [Jesus], we do not know where he comes from.” As the big men—respected leaders—this statement was intended to marginalize the healed man, placing him outside their camp. They were in effect saying that the blind man’s healer was not worthy even of their notice.
But the healed man is quick on his feet and answered them, “Why, this is an amazing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes.” He did not allow himself to be made insignificant in their eyes.
The man went on to reason quite effectively with these leaders showing he was not intimidated by them. Psychologists call this self-differentiation, a term that sums up Jesus’ own approach to his people—compassionate and empathic towards them but not controlled by them.
The Difference between the Man and His Parents
However, there is a distinct difference between the man born blind and his parents. Where he was unwilling to be intimidated by the religious leaders, his parents were clearly frightened by them. The Jews, when they heard about this miracle at the hands of Jesus, went to his parents and asked them about Jesus. The Jews did not believe a miracle had taken place.
Scripture tells us his parents answered them saying:
“We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. 21 But how he now sees we do not know, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself.” 22(His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone should confess Jesus to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue.)
John 9:20-23 (ESV)
Fear of Loss
This is the story of so many who are intimidated by leaders. Followers who fear loss can be easily manipulated. It is how toxic leaders retain their authority over others.
Where a good and godly leader—who respects his subordinates and wisely encourages their talents and skills—will gain the respect and honor from subordinates, a toxic leader will use his followers’ fears to control them for his own ends.
The only way for toxic leaders—who bring destruction on churches, organizations, governments, and businesses—to be eradicated is by people like the man born blind. These are the people who recognize that they are made in the image of God and therefore of much greater value than the leader acknowledges.
These change agents are the ones who refuse to fear consequences that may indeed come. The consequences of standing up to powerful people can be devastating. They know that in standing up they might lose their job, their respect in the community, family, or financial support.
But, to these change agents, these things are not worth the coddling of a wicked leader.
I am Not that Man
I say this like I am that man. But I am most certainly not that man.
When we left our mission agency, we waited until we were half way around the world to write to the board of directors. We had left our job; our children were free from their school; we had gotten clear of their ability to do any real damage.
Others may actually have much greater courage. In this writing I want to encourage them. They are the true change agents.
I have seen multiple cases where a church leader has been toxic in certain areas of his shepherding and has plagerized his teaching.
There seems to be a certain sinful desire in man to gain the glory. Rather than give credit where it is due, they use impressive information or ideas from the thoughts of others and present it as their own.
There are certainly mistakes made. It is not that uncommon to have read or heard something in days—or years—past that pop into mind while studying Scripture that seems like it did just that: pop into your mind. Recently, I have used a particular phrase multiple times that someone reading it asked if it came from someone else’s book. It hit me that indeed it was and it is unique enough that I need to be referencing the author’s work.
Seeking Glory for Others
Leaders of Christian organizations, churches, and businesses need to take a principle from this idea: The Lord desires us to humbly seek the glory of others.
Jesus helps us understand how important it is to do this in John 7. There the Apostle John explains:
About the middle of the feast Jesus went up into the temple and began teaching. 15 The Jews therefore marveled, saying, “How is it that this man has learning, when he has never studied?” 16 So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. 17 If anyone’s will is to do God’s will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. 18 The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no falsehood.
John 7:14-18 (ESV)
There is a principal here that challenges our puffed-up selves. We want glory. We desire glory.
To be the first to have thought of an idea or developed a program or reached many people. It is insidious. It is like black tendrils reaching into our hearts and turning it ganegrene.
There is an incredible story of man’s arrogance and the judgment that God brought in response. King Herod, who ruled when Jesus was crucified, was speaking before the people and this is what happened:
And the people were shouting, “The voice of a god, and not of a man!” 23 Immediately an angel of the Lord struck him down, because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and breathed his last.
Acts 12:22-23 (ESV)
Jesus shows us a better way. Despite being God, he humbled himself and gave credit to his Father—certainly one of the many incomprehensible aspects of Trinitarian theology. It gives us a perfect example of what leaders should be doing every day. A Christian leader’s responsibility is to first give God the glory and secondly to give his team the glory.
Teaming
I have written often about “teams” in the organizational and church setting using the research of others with much greater knowledge than me. Amy Edmondson, in her book called Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy provides wonderful analysis and application of this idea.1
Edmondson notes that organizations (businesses) need to learn in order to develop and grow. They must respond to the ever-changing environments in which we live and work. Unfortunately, she writes, “Many organizations still rely on the top-down, command-and-control approaches that fueled growth and profitability in the industrial era.” (loc. 267-268)
Many churches and Christian organizations have a high regard for submission to and the rule of those in positions of authority. We give respect to elders and bosses and those older than us. This is all well and good, but I want in this writing to challenge those who live in those positions of power and authority whether primarily relational or formal.
If these leaders want to minister to their flocks whether in a business, church, or non-profit organization, they will need to take on the words of Jesus and learn from those who have studied this extensively like Edmondson.
In defining the helpfulness of teams, Edmondson explains,
Teaming blends relating to people, listening to other points of view, coordinating actions, and making shared decisions.
loc. 278-279
These are the first steps.
How many leaders do you know truly listen to other points of view . . . and receive them graciously without criticism but truly open-mindedness? Without defensiveness of their own ideas? Do you?
And then, make “shared decisions?”
We are getting closer to Jesus’ words, “The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true.”
There needs to be an intentionality in leadership to build these teams where glory is given to others not self. Edmondson points out,
Teaming, it seems, requires a new type of leadership that supports speaking up, asking questions, and sharing ideas. In short, teaming requires a leadership mindset that cultivates an environment conducive to learning. I use the term “organizing to learn” to describe this leadership mindset and its accompanying practices.
loc. 622-624
Just think: Jesus was the perfect leader. He never made a bad decision. He was omniscient—he had all knowledge.
And yet, you continually see him working with others to help them come to decisions and work things through. He does not crush them with his own ideas—though he could very easily, because his ideas are always right—much like he handles his disciples when he sends them out to learn by experience in Luke 10. He gave them the basic ground rules of engagement and then received them back with encouragement for all they learned and saw.
You can hear their excitement in becoming an integral part of Jesus’ work. He allowed them to experience glory as they went about teaching and healing.
Tapping the Gifts of Subordinates
Edmondson speaks of image-bearing in subordinates without necessarily understanding how God created his people in his image:
The difference starts with a basic mindset about human beings. Whereas industrialization essentially infantilized workers, the knowledge-based economy only works well when it restores workers on all levels to self-respecting, self-determining adulthood.
loc. 845-847
Giving glory to another means you respect their views and wish their abilities to be tapped and encouraged. But this isn’t just using them. Get what you can out of them and discard them.
That is the makings of the toxic leader.
A leader must truly respect and desire to build up the talents in his subordinates. This can open the way for those under authority to truly use their gifts. But that isn’t natural in the hierarchy of the church, organization, or business as Edmondson notes:
Research shows that hierarchy, by its very nature, dramatically reduces speaking up by those lower in the pecking order. . . As a result, in most organizations, even if leaders at the top of the hierarchy say they welcome employee feedback, and even if people have the knowledge and training to say something of importance , they still may remain silent out of fear of negative consequences.
loc. 1226-1227, 1229-1231
It takes real work and care to develop the voices of those under your leadership. Much of that care comes in how the leader responds to ideas of subordinates. Does the pastor take ideas and use them even when they conflict with his own?
Does the manager run with a subordinate’s idea though he knows it may fail . . . and then give encouragement and help in responding to the problems created by the failure? Rather than scolding and anger?
Give Away the Glory
Toxic leadership most often involves the failure to fulfill the biblical example that Paul teaches in Ephesians when he says church leaders need “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.”
So too, organizational and business leaders are called to do everything possible to build up the ministry—and glory—of their subordinates.
Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy. Edmondson, Amy C. , 1 edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2012. ↩︎
Within Christian circles there is much talk of “laying down your life” for others. We talk about it in the contexts of marriage and leadership in particular.
Though most people likely have some idea from where the idea comes—the Bible—they may not know specifically the passage.
In John 10, Jesus is speaking to the crowds. He has just healed a man that was blind since he was born (John 9). It is an extraordinary event (read more about it here). Jesus goes on to teach following this event and creates a “division” among the Jews. And though the Jewish leaders suggest Jesus’ words in John 10 about the “good shepherd” are coming from a demon-possessed man, the people respond, “These are not the words of one who is oppressed by a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind (Jn 10:21)?”
The words Jesus gives to the crowds are hard words, but particularly hard for leaders in their cultural context. Whereas leaders in that time “lorded it over” their subordinates—as Jesus says in Matthew 20:25—he was calling leaders (and others) to be willing to die in the care of subordinates. This is not too far off as a description of leadership even today.
Studies continually show that a large percentage of employees struggle with a toxic boss or manager.
Kusy, Mitchell, and Holloway, Elizabeth, Toxic Workplace!: Managing Toxic Personalities and Their Systems of Power, 1st Edition (2009)
In John 10:7 Jesus begins to speak figuratively of a shepherd who cares for his sheep. He draws a distinction between a hired hand and the sheep-owning shepherd. This shepherd is not just a paid employee of the owner, but the owner of the sheep himself. The sheep understand this shepherd— “They hear his voice” —and they follow him. They trust him. They know he wants their good.
No Running Away
The good shepherd doesn’t run off when things get tough. He doesn’t leave his sheep unprotected, even when there is danger afoot.
He also draws a distinction between a “thief” who comes to “steal and destroy” and the good shepherd who gives life to the sheep. He provides good pasture and protection from the wolves and the sheep’s own stupidity. While sheep are always “looking for ways to die,” as one sheep rancher told some visitors, the good shepherd looks out for them.
This analogy points to Jesus Christ, who is the only really Good Shepherd. We can’t forget that.
If we lead others . . .
But it also challenges those who lead to be like Jesus. We are being continually conformed to the image of Jesus and this is a part of that. If we lead others, we need to—
Know our sheep that they might know us.
Be trustworthy that they may trust us.
Be respectful that they may respect us.
Look out for their good, though we may be put in very uncomfortable positions.
For example, standing up for them that, when we do, others look upon us with disfavor because we are associating with and supporting those people.
As Paul challenged the Philippian church, “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. 4 Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. 5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.” Philippians 2:3-7
Is this the kind of leader you are?
What would Jesus do?
“The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. . . No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord.”
