When Church Leaders Act Like Abusive Husbands

In my last post, I mentioned that a board member of my ex-church once told me that I had a problem submitting to "godly" authority. I responded by telling him I didn't have a problem submitting to Godly authority. And he didn't like that. At all. I saw his anger. And I didn't care.

Because I knew I wasn't the problem.

My lack of submission wasn't the problem.

But it's only in the last few days, I've seen with clarity what the real problem was.

As I wrote in that last post, the issue of how the church has failed survivors of domestic abuse has hit the headlines here in Australia. And in following the conversations being held, the stories being told, and the responses and reactions of different people, I have seen more clearly into the realities of my own experience of abuse in the church.

And I've had a moment of revelation. An "aha!" moment.

The real problem in our church was not my failure to submit to "godly" authority. It was the failure of its leaders to serve as Jesus served.

In the stories of domestic abuse that I've been reading, the husbands all quoted scriptures to demand submission from their wives. The husbands claimed they had "godly" authority over their wives, and based on this supposed authority they thought it was entirely appropriate to demand that their wives submit to them, no matter how harshly or hurtfully they treated them.

Of course, what they failed to realise is that their use (or misuse) of scripture damns them, not their wives. Because the scriptural call on them as husbands is to love their wives sacrificially, not to sacrifice those they love on the altar of their own inflated egos.

In similar fashion, my fellow leaders appeared to believe they had the right - in the name of God - to enforce submission and to compel obedience from their brothers and sisters. They showed willing to inflict hurt on others in order to gain the desired outcome, and then berate them for being wounded. And in doing so, they displayed their own failure. Because the God from whom they claimed to derive their authority is the God who equates greatness with servanthood, not tyranny. In demanding servility from others, they failed to obey the one who said he came to serve, not to be served.

You see, the problem was not with my refusal to submit. I knew I had nothing to fear from submitting to Godly authority, because I knew that truly Godly authority would never act in a way that harmed me. The "problem" was that I wouldn't submit to abuse. People didn't like me naming it for what it was and, using the same tactics as those abusive husbands, they tried to blame me. Like an abused wife I struggled with that, and sometimes I even fought back, but that did not make me "the problem".

The problem was created by those who, in attempting to crown one man "king" in the church, failed to acknowledge the true King. It lay with those who, in seeking to "lord it over" others, failed to obey the words of the "Lord over all". It was caused by those who, in demanding submission from others, failed to submit to the teachings of Jesus who said, "Do you understand what I’ve done for you? You call me teacher and Lord, and you’re right because that’s what I am. So if I, your Lord and teacher, have washed your feet, you must wash each other’s feet. I’ve given you an example that you should follow."

That was the real problem in our midst. "Leaders" demanding submission instead of displaying servanthood. "Followers" who refused to follow.

Kings and Other Despots

Back in the day, there was a concept known as the "Divine Right of Kings". This meant that if you happened to be lucky enough to be born into the right family, you got to rule - no questions asked.

You got to do and say whatever you pleased and no-one had the right to challenge you. You got to dictate to others how they lived and what they believed.

You had God himself in your back pocket!

Today, there are still some people who think they are entitled to power, privilege and respect with no questions tolerated. Many of them call themselves "pastors".

The only difference I can see is that these days dissenters aren't beheaded.

They are hounded from churches and shunned. They are discredited and silenced. And they are threatened with legal action.

And for too many people, this is normal christianity!

But as the exposure of scandal and abuse in the 'church' increases...

and the appalling hubris of 'pastor' after 'pastor' is revealed... 

I think about the only King who truly had 'divine right' on his side. 

And I thank God, that he chose to give up that right.

That he chose to humble himself. 

That he chose to serve.

(Luke 22:24-27)

Christian Celebrity Culture

I came across this Facebook post from Kris Vallotton last week. As of today, it has received over 1,500 responses. And as far as I can see scrolling down the first few hundred, they are all messages of thanks and applause.

But I have spent the last week struggling with it - feeling like I must inhabit an alternate universe. Because when I read this post, I didn't feel like applauding.

I was distressed!

Before I explain, let me clarify why I am sharing my response. This is not a personal attack on one man. And I do get the idea that he's encouraging people to work hard for what they want. I have no issue with that at all!

It's just that I was really disquieted by the first part of his post. It sounded way too much like the toxic celebrity culture that has done so much lasting damage within the 'church'.

My congregation consisted of about 11 people; 8 of which had Alzheimer's. When I would a yell a powerful point, (I used to preach with drama), several of them would pee the floor and the nurse would wheel them out.

This made me cringe. These were people. Real people! And yet this sentence de-humanises them. Turns them into a bit of a joke. They appear only as a backdrop to Mr Vallotton's preaching!

Which raises questions in my mind - questions I would ask Kris Vallotton if I could: Did your yelling bless those people? Did you think about the poor staff who had to clean up after them? Did it occur to you to change your approach to accommodate the particular needs of those to whom you were preaching?

Or were they just a means to an end - an opportunity for you to prove your faithfulness so that you could move on to the 'real deal'?

Bill Johnson taught me that if I prepared as if I was teaching 1000s, someday God would entrust 1000s to me.

It disturbs me that we so often reduce God to a slot-machine, and loving service to a formula. If I do X, then God must bless and multiply what I do.

Then we play the numbers game and equate 'success' with the size of our 'ministry'.

'Our' ministry becomes the focus - not simply loving and serving others. 

So I spent hours every week, reading, studying, and preparing my messages. As I prepared, I would envision myself in stadiums filled with hungry people, all listening to me preaching. 

It seems like the focus was all on the preaching. But was there any thought during those hours of hard work for the actual recipients of this preparation? What were their needs? How could they be blessed? Were they even in the equation at all?

It sounds like Mr Vallotton was so busy envisioning stadiums of hungry people, that he couldn't see the "least of these" that God had placed right in front of him.

I may be misinterpreting the man, but I've seen this attitude way too often to be anything but disturbed by even the suggestion of it.

It's the fantasy of having thousands of people all looking at me. Listening to me. Being fed by me. And as we have seen, that attitude of celebrity culture in our churches is toxic.

I hesitate to point out the obvious, but Mark Driscoll is a startling example of where that thinking leads: "Look at all the people I'm reaching! What's a few people being trampled underfoot (or run over by the bus!) when I'm doing so much good for the kingdom?"

The trouble is that most of the time the kingdom that is being built is not God's!

Many times I would preach at the hospital with my eyes closed...I was preaching to a different reality.

Again, I do not want to make assumptions about Mr Vallotton's motivation here, but this sounds too much like the celebrity attitude. "This lowly group is not my real destiny - they're just a stepping stone. I was born to preach before thousands!"

And yet, as I've said, these were real people Mr Vallotton closed his eyes to. People who apparently weren't a good enough 'reality' for him.

I have tried to make it clear that this is not a personal attack on Kris Vallotton here. What I am attacking is the toxic attitude that has so permeated our 'christian culture', that we applaud it without thinking.

In fact, we don't even recognise it because 'ministry' has become the goal - not people. 'Success' is measured by how many people we 'reach', not by how well we love.

The unwritten promise is that if we work hard enough, God will reward us with fame and fortune... or at least a 'real' ministry.

Too many western christians have bought into the celebrity fantasy and have forgotten that Jesus came to serve. And to die!

"Jesus got them together to settle things down. “You’ve observed how godless rulers throw their weight around,” he said, “and when people get a little power how quickly it goes to their heads. It’s not going to be that way with you. Whoever wants to be great must become a servant. Whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave. That is what the Son of Man has done: He came to serve, not to be served—and then to give away his life in exchange for many who are held hostage." (Mark 10:42-45)

Now, if Kris Vallotton had written about how he'd knelt down Sunday after Sunday and cleaned up the urine-soaked floor, that would have really been something!

But we want to avoid the part where Jesus calls us to serve the "least of these", and we become so obsessed with trying to be 'somebody' that we fail to grasp the fact that in Jesus we already are somebody?

This world really does not need even one more celebrity - but it sure as hell could use some servants!!!

Which is Kingdom?

Naked Pastor

Scenario 1:

Men using politics and power plays to 'do church'. Machinations and manipulation. People being abused and sacrificed to the gods of 'unity' and 'leadership'. Submission and respect being demanded - on pain of rejection and shunning. Sheep being scattered and slaughtered by the wolves who have seized control. 'Leaders' refusing to be accountable to anyone except yes men, refusing to even talk to those they have abused. The bruised and battered being thrown out of 'the church', blamed for their own woundedness. Those responsible for the wounding flinging accusations of 'trouble-maker', 'bitter', 'divisive'.

Scenario 2:

One young woman moving to a foreign country simply because she wants to share the love of God with others. Trusting him completely for guidance and provision. Rescuing those who've been abused by the world's system. Loving them - treating them with dignity and worth. Pouring her life out in service to those the world has used and thrown away. Caring for the outcasts, the rejects, the 'least of these'. Sacrificing comfort, security and privilege; yet seeing it not as a sacrifice but a joy and delight.

Question:

Which of these two pictures best illustrates the Kingdom of God? Which do you think makes Jesus smile? Which is the outcome of being Spirit-led?

Lover or Prostitute?: The Question that Changed My Life

By David Ryser. Re-posted from his blog Catch the Wind

A number of years ago, I had the privilege of teaching at a school of ministry. My students were hungry for God, and I was constantly searching for ways to challenge them to fall more in love with Jesus and to become voices for revival in the Church. I came across a quote attributed most often to Rev. Sam Pascoe. It is a short version of the history of Christianity, and it goes like this: Christianity started in Palestine as a fellowship; it moved to Greece and became a philosophy; it moved to Italy and became an institution; it moved to Europe and became a culture; it came to America and became an enterprise.

Some of the students were only 18 or 19 years old--barely out of diapers--and I wanted them to understand and appreciate the import of the last line, so I clarified it by adding, “An enterprise. That’s a business.” After a few moments Martha, the youngest student in the class, raised her hand. I could not imagine what her question might be. I thought the little vignette was self-explanatory, and that I had performed it brilliantly. Nevertheless, I acknowledged Martha’s raised hand, “Yes, Martha.” She asked such a simple question, “A business? But isn’t it supposed to be a body?” I could not envision where this line of questioning was going, and the only response I could think of was, “Yes.” She continued, “But when a body becomes a business, isn’t that a prostitute?”

The room went dead silent.

For several seconds no one moved or spoke. We were stunned, afraid to make a sound because the presence of God had flooded into the room, and we knew we were on holy ground. All I could think in those sacred moments was, “Wow, I wish I’d thought of that.” I didn’t dare express that thought aloud. God had taken over the class.

Martha’s question changed my life. For six months, I thought about her question at least once every day. “When a body becomes a business, isn’t that a prostitute?” There is only one answer to her question. The answer is “Yes.” The American Church, tragically, is heavily populated by people who do not love God. How can we love Him? We don’t even know Him; and I mean really know Him.

What do I mean when I say “really know Him?” Our understanding of knowing and knowledge stems from our western culture (which is based in ancient Greek philosophical thought). We believe we have knowledge (and, by extension, wisdom) when we have collected information. A collection of information is not the same thing as knowledge, especially in the culture of the Bible (which is an eastern, non-Greek, culture). In the eastern culture, all knowledge is experiential. In western/Greek culture, we argue from premise to conclusion without regard for experience--or so we think. An example might be helpful here. Let us suppose a question based upon the following two premises: First, that wheat does not grow in a cold climate and second, that England has a cold climate. The question: Does wheat grow in England? The vast majority of people from the western/Greek culture would answer, “No. If wheat does not grow in a cold climate and if England has a cold climate, then it follows that wheat does not grow in England.” In the eastern culture, the answer to the same question, based on the same premises, most likely would be, “I don’t know. I’ve never been to England.” We laugh at this thinking, but when I posed the same question to my friends from England, their answer was, “Yes, of course wheat grows in England. We’re from there, and we know wheat grows there.” They overcame their cultural way of thinking because of their life experience.

Experience trumps information when it comes to knowledge.

A similar problem exists with our concept of belief. We say we believe something (or someone) apart from personal experience. This definition of belief is not extended to our stockbroker, however. Again, allow me to explain. Suppose my stockbroker phones me and says, “I have a hot tip on a stock that is going to triple in price within the next week. I want your permission to transfer $10,000 from your cash account and buy this stock.” That’s a lot of money for me, so I ask, “Do you really believe this stock will triple in price, and so quickly?” He/she answers, “I sure do.” I say, “That sounds great! How exciting! So how much of your own money have you invested in this stock?” He/she answers, “None.” Does my stockbroker believe? Truly believe? I don’t think so, and suddenly I don’t believe, either. How can we be so discerning in the things of this world, especially when they involve money, and so indiscriminate when it comes to spiritual things? The fact is, we do not know or believe apart from experience. The Bible was written to people who would not understand the concepts of knowledge, belief, and faith apart from experience.

I suspect God thinks this way also.

So I stand by my statement that most American Christians do not know God--much less love Him. The root of this condition originates in how we came to God. Most of us came to Him because of what we were told He would do for us. We were promised that He would bless us in life and take us to heaven after death. We married Him for His money, and we don’t care if He lives or dies as long as we can get His stuff. We have made the Kingdom of God into a business, merchandising His anointing. This should not be. We are commanded to love God, and are called to be the Bride of Christ--that’s pretty intimate stuff. We are supposed to be His lovers. How can we love someone we don’t even know? And even if we do know someone, is that a guarantee that we truly love them?

Are we lovers or prostitutes?

I was pondering Martha’s question again one day, and considered the question, “What’s the difference between a lover and a prostitute?” I realized that both do many of the same things, but a lover does what she does because she loves. A prostitute pretends to love, but only as long as you pay. Then I asked the question, “What would happen if God stopped paying me?”

For the next several months, I allowed God to search me to uncover my motives for loving and serving Him. Was I really a true lover of God? What would happen if He stopped blessing me? What if He never did another thing for me? Would I still love Him? Please understand, I believe in the promises and blessings of God. The issue here is not whether God blesses His children; the issue is the condition of my heart. Why do I serve Him? Are His blessings in my life the gifts of a loving Father, or are they a wage that I have earned or a bribe/payment to love Him? Do I love God without any conditions? It took several months to work through these questions. Even now I wonder if my desire to love God is always matched by my attitude and behavior. I still catch myself being disappointed with God and angry that He has not met some perceived need in my life. I suspect this is something which is never fully resolved, but I want more than anything else to be a true lover of God.

So what is it going to be? Which are we, lover or prostitute? There are no prostitutes in heaven, or in the Kingdom of God for that matter, but there are plenty of former prostitutes in both places. Take it from a recovering prostitute when I say there is no substitute for unconditional, intimate relationship with God. And I mean there is no palatable substitute available to us (take another look at Matthew 7:21-23 sometime). We must choose.

THE TOP 5 BEST BOOKS ON CHRISTIAN LEADERSHIP

subversive1: THE TOP 5 BEST BOOKS ON CHRISTIAN LEADERSHIP:

MATTHEW

MARK

LUKE

JOHN

ACTS

Leadership

If you were to ask any random group of people to define leadership, I imagine you would find most answers would be framed in terms of title, power and position. If you posed that same question within the church, my guess is your results would differ only in the use of the word ‘servant’ as a prefix.

Yet I suspect you would find that the addition of that word makes precious little difference to the observable behaviours of many in leadership. Personally, I have seen and heard of too many instances where leaders are willing to use their position to coerce, constrain and compel. Playing the authority card, pulling rank and enforcing conformity are all too common in the church today.

However, Jesus was quite adamant that we were not to operate in this way. When the mother of James and John started lobbying for position for her sons, Jesus actually disclaimed the authority to make that call. (See Matthew 20:20-27)

He then went on to say, “You know that foreign rulers like to order their people around. And their great leaders have full power over everyone they rule. But don’t act like them. If you want to be great, you must be the servant of all the others. And if you want to be first, you must be the slave of the rest.”

He challenged his followers to put aside their desire for high position and prestige, and he set the example by assuming the posture of a servant. He was willing to abase himself before his own creation. He who could claim the throne of heaven stepped down in humility and love, serving those he could rightfully have claimed as servants.

Why?

Because he wanted us to understand that in the Kingdom he was establishing leadership is serving. Simply serving.