The Reconstructed

Servant Shepherds

I think one of the most compelling things about Jesus’ teaching is what He says to those in leadership about serving. In Matthew 20 Jesus describes a type of leadership in the Kingdom that is countercultural to the way the world describes it. He says, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant.” He tells his disciples that their demonstration of greatness and power in the upside down kingdom is in their service. He appeals to the fact that He, Jesus, himself has come to give his life as a ransom for many.

I’ve been in Scranton for about a month, and one of the first things that happened when I arrived was finding out about spiritual/sexual abuse allegations against the founder of the International House of Prayer Mike Bickle (no relation to one of my previous recent posts regarding Bill Bickle, someone I wrestled and lost to 3 times in high school). I was heavily influenced by IHOP in college and have fond yet challenging memories regarding the ministry during my 4 years at JMU where I consumed a lot of IHOP content. I cried when I read the allegations.

In the days and weeks that followed, I fell deeper into confusion over how IHOP has handled the allegations of abuse and became further frustrated by own experiences with abuse and neglect that I have experienced from pastoral/spiritual leadership. I am aware we in the Church are still broken; I am broken, yet I don’t think it is too much to ask for us to do better, to care, actually care with compassion, and address abuse rather than tolerate it or sweep it under the rug.

The following are just a few consequences of delaying dealing with abuse: 1) provides opportunity for further harm 2) prevents other people from speaking up about abuse because they see how it is handled and 3) is a terrible witness to those outside of church communities and in many cases a terrible witness to those within a church community. In short, people in leadership need to be held accountable for how they address allegations of abuse and how they discipline those guilty of abuse, and how they themselves are complicit in allowing abuse to continue.

1 Peter echoes this call in 1 Peter 5 when talking about qualifications for elders or shepherds. He gives this admonition, “Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve;  not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.” That phrase “lording it over those entrusted to you” means not exercising excessive or decisive control, not behaving like others should be fully subjected to you as a master.

It shares this qualification for the posture of an elder, prior to any admonishment regarding who should submit to that kind of authority. The onus first falls on the ones with perceived positions of power to act in accordance with what they are entrusted with.

Submission

Even in Peter’s words regarding submission to governing authorities he appeals to a submission based on the perceived good that comes from submitting, which I believe is necessary to highlight. I have heard people say that submission is only submission when one does not want to do something, which is no where near true to what the word submission means in the Greek. The word is mostly used in regards to working relationships. It is mostly assumed that within these relationships, for example, when a boss asks an employee to do something, it is for the good of the whole. Thus, we should not assume or even believe that the submission called for in Scripture whether in the household or within the church or even outside of the church is based on some arbitrary whim or desire, rather it is for the good of the one submitting and for the community of the faithful. In other words, all parties should have some idea of what good is coming from submission.

I could say a lot more regarding submission but the last thing I will say about submission that even in the most severe extent of the word as we know it: if someone is asking us to submit physically or to the point of pain, the reason people submit whether in life or in a sparring contest is because at the bear minimum they believe submitting now will allow them to fight another day. The end goal of submission is enduring faithfulness to God for the good of His people not surrendered obedience to people to satisfy someones amusement or pleasure or worse their own deceptive desires.

This by in large is not the posture the church at large especially, those guilty of spiritual abuse have taken in the church. The church has largely become secular in its areas of leadership which is evidenced by most books on leadership “Christians” have put out or consumed in the last two decades. Spiritual abuse, lordship authority, lack of servanthood, desire for control, failure to repent or acknowledge wrongs, sins or failures, and a desire to cover it up has marred “Christian” leadership and churches evangelical and high-church alike. These are all products of a church being so far from what Jesus intended because of a desire to produce branded organizations with a marketable figurehead rather than a humble body with Christ as the Head. This is the result of Cosmetic Christianity.

Even in areas where blatant abuse is not identified, many churches are marked by a lack of accountability; this desire to remain unaccountable in relation to finances, hiring decisions, church discipline and in some cases outright illegal activity, relational and financial and the like has in turn led to a radical exodus of individuals from institutional church and have left a multitude of the would be faithful clamoring for answers they are not getting from a community that has prioritized organizational growth and individual image over vulnerable mutually submissive relationships that seek the will of God in Christ.

As a result, you have irreconcilable differences and a veil over most everything that is beautiful in relation to the power of the gospel.

Allegations

This is often how allegations are played out in the realm of spiritual/pastoral/elder abuse or mishandling of allegations in the church. In fact the psychological term for this is DARVO. DENY, ATTACK, REVERSE VICTIM AND OFFENDER. An institution or organization or the representative of, may own something partially, but deny the main offense, then attack the character of the one doing the confronting, and then turns the accusation around on the victim/whistleblower and makes them into the offender.

And I believe it all starts early. It starts when we close our ears to the hurting. It starts when we immediately discount allegations of wrongdoing and dub the accuser or victim as in the wrong or discount, undermine or even dismiss the accusations of the hurting. This is Luther during the Reformation. Luther approaches a bishop, writes a letter to the pope mostly around selling of indulgences, a couple of months go by, he is given an assurance that the reason for a slow response “is great care is being taken as is proper” or “they are taking allegations seriously.” Instead of looking at the allegations themselves the pope makes it a point to start looking into Luther, which led to looking to cast down Luther’s arguments, which led to Luther’s excommunication. That is a drastic summary but the formula is important.

Primarily this happens because an institution and its spiritual leaders have forgotten its role as shepherds of a flock and is more concerned with maintaining an oppressive structure or system of authority. This happens in conservative and liberal organizations/churches alike. Ministers/elders forget they are serving a community or sometimes one sheep, and instead stand in an entitled posture in an authoritarian structure that does not facilitate the ministry of reconciliation. They’d rather control individuals than own up to their failures because of a fear of how it will make them look.

You can almost immediately tell the health or priorities (you might be able to use those two words interchangeably) of an organization or church by how they handle accusations. If they don’t empathize with the offended, if they don’t offer an explanation of how they plan to handle the accused, if they delay a response indefinitely and then make demands of the victim, perpetuating the pain of the victim and others associated with them, if they deny and seek to cover their own mistakes rather than owning them, you can be almost certain they are prioritizing an organization over people and perception over interpersonal relationships. They have deemed there is too much at stake (usually something financial) to risk reconciliation, church discipline, or restitution. This is a major sign that an organization is not working for the furthering of the gospel or engaged in obedience to the Holy Spirit but is instead interested in preserving itself and its reputation. Yet all things will be brought to light.

How it is brought to light will be the discussion of my next post.