Uncovering
and Facing Spiritual Abuse
When people first attend a church and then continue to attend, it is
usually because of some very positive things-- the services, the
people, the music, the message, the fellowship, or the atmosphere.
Whatever it is, there is some positive element that makes people return
and in time invest themselves in a church.
How shocking and unexpected it is when aspects of spiritual
mistreatment or abuse then
come into view! Spiritual abuse occurs when a person in a
position of spiritual authority misuses his or her position. Instead of
serving those being led and directing them towards God, they
are used for some other end. This can include a wide variety of
behaviors, from
outright mistreatment and harshness to subtly directing everything to
the advancement of the agenda of the leader or the leader's personal
prestige without regard for the well-being of the individual. People in
a church
environment have a reasonable expectation that leadership will point
them to
God and what is right in his eyes, not to take their honest desire to
serve God and exploit it to bolster the power or control of the leader
or the church system and leave them empty.
Other authors
have defined spiritual abuse in these ways:
Spiritual
abuse is the mistreatment of a person who is in need of help, support
or greater spiritual empowerment, with the result of weakening,
undermining or decreasing that person's spiritual empowerment. That's a
broad view. Let's refine that with some functional definitions.
Spiritual abuse can occur when a leader uses his or her spiritual position to control or
dominate another person. It often involves overriding the feelings and
opinions of another, without regard to what will result in the other
person's state of living, emotions or spiritual well-being. ... Power
is used to bolster the position or needs of a leader, over and above
one
who comes to them in need. (The Subtle
Power of Spiritual Abuse, David Johnson and Jeff VanVonderen,
20-21; italics in original)
Spiritual abuse happens when a leader with spiritual authority uses
that authority to coerce, control or exploit a follower, thus causing
spiritual wounds. (Healing
Spiritual Abuse, Ken Blue, p. 12)
Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: "The teachers of
the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and
do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do
not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on
men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger
to move them. Everything they do is done for men to see: They make
their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they
love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the
synagogues; they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men
call them 'Rabbi.' (Matthew 23:1-7)
This is why I write these things when I am absent, that when I come I
may not have to be harsh in my use of authority—the authority the Lord
gave me for building you up, not for tearing you down. (2 Corinthians
13:10)
For a more detailed discussion of these criteria, see the Barnabas
Ministry article Characteristics
of Unhealthy, Abusive and Cultic Church Environments. Further, it
is important to note that spiritual abuse can happen with
or without the intent to cause harm. It is the end result that matters.
Beyond the basic characteristics, there are some very real dynamics
about spiritual abuse
that need to be candidly discussed. I write of these, unfortunately,
from personal experience.
Not
Everybody May See the Abuse, But That Doesn’t Mean It Isn’t Real
I remember my first encounter with spiritual
abuse. I was relatively new member of a congregation and the campus
minister was being forced to resign. I had nothing but positive
experiences with this man. He taught me the Bible, he baptized me, he
gave me great advice at various times and helped me get connected in
the church. There were complaints about his methods, the place where he
had received his ministry training, and the program he was running.
All I knew is that everything looked fine to me. To make a long story
short, a church split ensued. I followed the campus minister with most
of the people I knew. I thought those who forced him to resign were
opposing God's work.
A year later, this minister was under fire again. This time, the
accusers of mistreatment were his most loyal lieutenants that had come
over from the previous church, as well as the elders who had supported
him during the split. I thought, what in the world was going
on? Did these people "go bad" too? I still didn't see any problems and
had largely positive experiences with the minister. Another split
ensued, and this time the minister left town.
Later on, I found out much of what was going on from this minister
himself and others. It was spiritual abuse-- making sure people
conformed to the system, not permitting questioning or challenging of
the system,
excessive regulating
of various areas of member's lives, minimizing the negative effects of
the system, and using various control tactics like shaming, humiliation
and the like.
There are two points here. First, not everybody will see
abuse. Many people will not see a problem at all, all they will see is
the positive things and they will not be able to understand why there
is a problem. They will not believe anything could be wrong. Second,
abuse is frequently
restricted to or most acute with staff and lay leadership groups.
Often, newer members will not see the problems.
As a result, I responded to these initial incidents as most people
would-- defending the minister in question and his system, and
denigrating those who raised the issues.
Another Example
Let me illustrate this phenomenon with another case in point. Just this
week as I'm editing this article, there has been news of a
prominent minister engaging in sexual immorality. Now listen to
some quotes from the story the day after it broke. From church members:
The
allegations stunned church members.
"It's political,
right
before the elections,"
said Brian Boals, a New Life member for 17 years.
Church member
E.J. Cox,
25, called the claims
"ridiculous."
"People are
always
saying stuff about Pastor
Ted," she said. "You just sort of blow it off. He's just like anyone
else in the public eye."
Now from a pastor at the church:
But a
pastor at Haggard's church wrote an e-mail to congregants saying "he
confessed to the overseers that some of the accusations against him are
true."
Though
this story is about misconduct and not spiritual abuse, this
illustrates a fact about the topic at hand. Did
you notice that the members of the church
were predisposed to
ridicule and disregard the allegations? Even
though they have been quickly acknowledged as at least somewhat true (further
action was later taken that largely confirmed all of the initial
allegations).
Why
did they defend? Because people naturally defend leaders they know and
like. This is a bias inherent in churches.
Now a more difficult question-- why didn't
the members say they wanted the story investigated and facts uncovered?
Or that they wanted to just know the truth? There is no simple answer
to this. I'm not a psychologist nor
a sociologist. But to me it is obvious that there are several
possibilities:
- Reluctance to challenge
something that is known and comfortable-- their view of
the church and its leader
- Misplaced loyalty to people
over truth ("don't confuse me with the facts")-- as though love and
truth cannot co-exist
- Dislike for those bringing the
accusations
- Value system that rates
loyalty, unity, partisanship or favoritism over truth
The Two
Worlds of Spiritual Abuse
The
next
experience that I want share about spiritual abuse I have personally
experienced
happened a few
years later. I had left my job as an electrical engineer in the defense
industry and was serving on the staff of the church as an intern
minister. While working for the Denver Church of Christ, I was planting
what
was
called a "house church" in Colorado Springs-- about 60 miles to the
south. We regularly commuted to Denver for all services and the like.
In the time I was doing this, I averaged 4000 miles per month on my car.
On staff, I routinely saw others treated meanly and harshly by the lead
minister and others in his good graces. For example, I
saw staff members blamed if the
attendance and baptism statistics for their group were judged to be
inadequate. These were evaluated every week, so this was a regular part
of staff meetings. Normally, no help was offered to improve the
situation, they were
just blamed and shamed for the stats and told to make them better.
I saw people
prohibited from
coming to staff meetings unless they brought a visitor to Sunday church
services the previous week.
Staff
members were often pitted against another, creating jealousy and
unhealthy competition instead of unity, teamwork and brotherhood. It
was a way to keep everybody off-balance, insecure and striving to avoid
getting on the lead minister's "bad list." People were mostly motivated
out of fear.
In general, nothing that any staff member did
could ever be good enough. No matter what good things might have been
done, staff members were frequently told how it could have been better.
I
saw people routinely berated and
humiliated to the point of tears over these or other things, often
quite minor, in
efforts to gain their submission or
"brokenness." And if there weren't tears, they would be further
rebuked for being "hard-hearted." It was widely held that if somebody
was penitent for something, there would be tears.
During the time I was on staff (less than a year), I saw
a dozen or more people removed from the staff for financial reasons (so
was said) or for "spiritual reasons" which looked mostly like a failure
to be adequately "broken." I'll talk more about being "broken" later,
but enforcing unquestioning control and creating an atmosphere
of fear was the standard operating procedure on the staff.
What did I do when I initially saw abuse on the staff?
- I was shocked.
- I was glad it
wasn't directed against me.
- I rationalized
that this ridiculous behavior
must be what "real
discipleship" is all about, and we all wanted to be "real disciples,"
right?
- I trusted the
leadership that this type of
training was what it took to become an effective minister. After all,
the lead minister was trained and mentored by the lead minster at a
large, fast-growing church.
- I thought these
people somehow deserved this
mistreatment, but that I was
not getting treated that way because I was better than them.
- I was afraid that
if I objected, I would be
next.
Worse,
I started to imitate this behavior.
Let me share a few examples of some of the harsh and abusive things I
did during
that time.
Once, our house church group was playing volleyball at an apartment
complex. I let one of the guys borrow my sunglasses. After it got dark,
he had put them down somewhere and couldn't find them anymore. He came
and told me, and though it was pitch dark out and late on a weeknight,
I
harshly told
him, "Go find them."
Another time, our group had a picnic. One of
the young women in the group playfully tossed some ice down my back,
and I
took it as evidence that she wasn't giving me the respect I was due as
the leader. So I scolded and belittled her in front of everybody
present. I was in charge, and she'd
better know it!
Another time, I was going over the list of people who were studying the
Bible to become Christians. As the leader, I was under tremendous
pressure to convert and baptize people. Quite of few of them were not
as eager to
move forward in studying as we expected, and I started calling them
"weenies" to
the lay leaders in my group as we crossed them off of the list of
current
studies. One of these other leaders later shared
with a group of 100-200 lay leaders in Denver that we had a "weenie
roast" and
whittled down our number of studies.
In addition, my whole leadership was about getting people to perform,
to make the stats better, to do what was expected. It was not primarily
about drawing people closer to God or enriching the fellowship. I was
on the hook for certain
things, and my leadership became about getting those people to do the
things I was on the hook for. I also maintained and enhanced my control
by regularly finding and addressing people's faults and putting them
down. I wasn't looking out for them anymore.
I remember trying to get a neighbor to come to a church event
(remember, this was one of the primary ways that people were judged in
this church). After showing some interest, he decided not to go. My
first thought was, "It's people like you that get me yelled at on
staff." Where was my concern for this individual? There wasn't much--
my concern was limited to whether or not he would come to an event and
join my group. Though I thought those would be the best things for him,
I didn't really care about what he wanted or thought he needed. I
didn't consider myself a
mean person, but I was
practicing spiritual abuse.
I'm not blaming others for what I did, but the culture of abuse just
has a way of expanding. I learned it, I practiced it, and then I passed
it on to others.
Do you see what was happening? People getting more involved in the
church were becoming more worldly, not more godly. If not confronted
and uncorrected, this becomes the normal culture of
the church. And that is exactly what happened at this particular
church.
Jesus talked about the principle of imitation:
He
also told them this parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind
man? Will they not both fall into a pit? A
student is not above his
teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher. (Luke 6:39-40)
Something not normally discussed when this
text is brought up is the context. In context, Jesus is telling us that
people following those doing bad things will also do bad things.
Paul also cited this phenomenon:
Do
not be misled: "Bad company corrupts good
character." (1 Corinthians 15:33)
But who would have thought that the "bad company" could be the
leadership of the church?
My Turn
Little did I realize that one
day, the harshness and abuse would come
my way. Shortly after these events, I wanted to get some help in
my spiritual life-- mostly because my house church was not baptizing
people as many people as
was expected by the lead minister, and it was "my fault." I
had asked
to get with the lead minister
and some trusted friends (all of whom were also on the staff) to talk. This
was
the expected behavior on my part, and several other interns on the
staff had already had similar discussions. The meeting was scheduled
for
midnight. Later I found out this was so my resistance would be low, not
just because of scheduling difficulties as I was led to believe.
The
lead minister-- the same one who was conducting the staff meetings I
spoke
of earlier-- asked me to confess all of my past sins. The sin list in
Galatians 5:19ff was gone through like a shopping list, with every
permutation you can imagine and some you couldn't possibly imagine. I
poured out my
heart to the minister and other friends that I trusted. When I was
finished with this, the lead minister yelled at me like
I was a bad dog. He said I was not a Christian, and I was never a
Christian. I was told I needed
to "get right with God" or else. As he berated me, I was told I was
hard-hearted and I was
going to "have to do it the hard way." The session lasted several
hours and ended up with me leaving as a bad dog who needed to "repent."
At the next staff meeting, I
was
explicitly called out
and reminded of others who had also received this same
treatment and
had just been fired from staff. I was warned that if I
didn't "repent" I would be gone too. I
was told I
couldn't stay after the business part of the meeting because they were
going to do something fun and it "wasn't
appropriate for me" (because I wasn't being "penitent").
I was told to fast and pray, which I did. I was told to apologize to
the people I led in the Colorado Springs group, which I had been
removed from
leading about a month earlier. I did this also. I considered this
reasonable.
However, I was also directed to wash the feet of certain individuals in
that group, which I did. Later on, I was sitting
in a meeting of about 100 or more other small group leaders, and the
sins I had confessed privately were told to that group for the
deliberate, specific purpose
of denigrating and
humiliating
me.
Since the lead minister had decreed that I wasn't a Christian, the
culmination of my repentance was being baptized
"as a
disciple." I
had already been baptized into Christ several years before, but that
was invalidated according to the decree of the lead minister and the
distorted doctrine of baptism in the church. Consenting to getting
re-baptized was the only way to end the extreme pressure that was on
me, and that had been made abundantly clear to me as in the threats in
the staff meeting and the like. This being
baptized "as a disciple" was code language for someone who had
been "broken" (or "reconstructed" as they also called it) in the manner
I have described. One might think I would have felt relieved after
getting baptized. Instead, I felt absolutely
terrible after consenting to this because it had violated my conscience
so deeply.
A month later, I was introduced to the
lead minister's supervisor (one of the elite "world sector leaders" in
that group of churches)
with the phrase, "He asked for a reconstruction, and he got a
reconstruction." The way the lead minister said this, it sounded like a
conquest or a spiritual rape. I don't mean any disrespect to rape
victims, but the experience was that severe.
That's what it felt like. It was an extreme exercise in
domination, control and violation of my spirit.
My personality type had even been changed by
the experience. I had
formerly tested as a C-D on the DISC scale; after
this
experience I was a straight C. The D (the outgoing, determined part of
my personality) had been beaten out of me.
I had seen this done to others, and now it was happening to me. It was
a living nightmare. I came looking for spiritual help and this is what
I got instead.
Why Was This
Accepted?
I
wasn't the first or last one to be treated this way. We all on staff
sat there and let this abusive minister abuse us, one by one.
Some were treated slightly better, others much worse. Why did I
tolerate it?
- He was in
authority. (Have you ever heard of
the Milgram
experiments? People tend do what those in authority say to do,
regardless
of the evidence of negative effects.)
- I thought it was
God's will.
- I saw other
godly people consent to it, so I thought it must be OK.
- I didn't want to
lose my job or "fail" in the
ministry. I was trapped.
This
"divide and conquer" pattern of abuse was specifically
designed to break down and
control the staff of the church. Period. It had nothing to do with
making people more godly, love God more, understand God's love for us
more, be more effective ministers. None of that. This church had a
warped view of discipleship and Christianity, and being humiliated and
broken down beyond comprehension was part of the deal.
In "Influence:
The Psychology of Persuasion" the author discusses harsh
initiation ceremonies that
various groups have-- sports teams, fraternities, the Marines, etc.
These groups retain these practices because those
who have been through them are now "in the club." Indeed, those of us
in this particular church movement that had been treated in
this way were "in the club." Some club! Is that the church I read about
in the Bible? No, not even close.
But there were others on the staff who never got this treatment. Why? Were
they already more godly than the rest? Not likely. Was the leader
saving the "treatment" for a more opportune time? Perhaps. But my
perspective is that they were
already loyal and under control. The mistreatment was about control.
However, even senior staff members got some of the harsh treatment from
time to
time. For example, once this lead minister admitted he deliberately did
not
return
the phone calls of one of these senior ministers trying to get help
leading his ministry because he was testing
him
to see how many times he'd call to "get advice." Many other times,
another senior minister in the group would be berated in front of the
group for the behavior of his son, who was about seven at the time.
Still another senior minister was berated for not having sex with his
wife on Mondays, the decreed "family day" for staff members (at least
this was in a men-only group discussion). I was
stunned at the thought that this staff of bruised and beaten-up people
was then expected to minister the gospel to others.
All of this was happening behind the closed doors of staff meetings.
The membership knew nothing of it.
Now this lead minister was an abusive bully
and being on staff (and its aftermath) was
the closest thing to a living hell that I have ever experienced.
However, the
rest of the
church admired him and looked up to him. He was their hero. After
services, there would be lines
of people waiting to speak to him. They thought he was wonderful. People
have a natural desire
to love and respect their leaders.
And the church was growing. About 300-400 people were baptized in this
congregation during the year I was on staff. Things sure looked
wonderful... on the outside.
I lived in a surreal world-- the public world of "isn't this church
great" and
the private world of terror from abusive behavior hanging over my head.
This abuse could be unleashed on a mere whim of the lead minister.
Diverting Attention
It's one thing for members to be reluctant about investigating
spiritual abuse, mistreatment or misconduct on the part of ministers.
It's another thing that these perpetrators and their defenders engage
in numerous tactics to obscure the facts. Sometimes this is deliberate,
sometimes unconscious, but
either way it is pathological.
After all of these experiences I described above, I spent many years
defending this movement. It's quite natural to defend
something of which you are a part and with which you identify. However,
the more I tried to defend it, the
more I realized how much it needed to change. I then spent many
more years trying to change it. For me, some minor changes had been
made and I honestly thought that if
other things
were just brought up "the right way" the necessary changes would take
place. I
then tried to communicate these things in "just the right way." In
fact, this website was originally started for the purpose of helping
those who had been deeply hurt and trying to address areas of needed
change in "just the right way." In time, I saw
for myself that there were some sacred cows that were never, ever going
to be given up.
Having spent years defending and addressing mistreatment and abuse,
I've been around the block a few times on diversions. There are so many
ways I've seen these diversions done, and I am sure
there are more variations. Some of these are actually quite
sophisticated. These seem to fit into 3 main categories- minimizing,
blaming the victim and
creating confusion.
Minimizing
- Abusers can say
they are imperfect ("nobody's
perfect") and therefore their abuse is excusable.
- Abusers can blame
their mistreatment of
others on how busy they are doing "God's work."
- Abusers may
apologize for "hurts" but never
take responsibility or ownership for their part in causing the hurt;
they will not call it
"sin" or "abuse."
- Abusers may
attempt to treat a series of
abuses as individual instances, fighting any attempts to
view them as systemic, habitual patterns of behavior.
Blame the Victim
- Abusers will claim that
people brought these issues up in the "wrong way" somehow.
- Abusers may claim
that those hurt are just
too sensitive, not mature enough, didn't
understand what was meant, or the like.
- A clever abuser
may make sure there are
plenty of people who think he is just wonderful. He can appeal
to them and make it look like those who are accusing him of abuse are
just "bitter" or "bad apples."
- The abused may be
accused of not
strictly following Matthew 18:15-17 (bring the matter to the person
privately
first).
Of course, abusers often intimidate and bully people,
so there is little likelihood that anyone will directly challenge them.
Further, these abusers are in a position of authority and can do
anything they want to any "uncooperative" people objecting to
mistreatment.
- Abusers can claim
if people had just come to
them and expressed how they felt, they would have been so
sorry for the hurts that were caused.
Creating Confusion
- Abusers may try to
associate themselves with
the good work of the church, so that holding them accountable for their
actions becomes equated with opposing or attacking the work of the
church.
- Abusers may appeal to
others that they are "under the attack of Satan" when they are simply
being held accountable.
- Abusers can act
hurt that these allegations
have been brought against them. They can "play the victim."
- The abuser
may appeal to the good results of
his ministry-- growth, expansion, or the like. This is an attempt to
suggest that the good outweighs the
bad. But both the good and bad fruit count.
- The abuser may
cite
Jesus' tough talks with the apostles (like his rebuke of Peter in
Matthew
16), Nehemiah's pulling out of hair of rebels (Nehemiah 13:25) or other
similar stories. The implication
here is that
abusive treatment is OK and even necessary. But was Jesus abusive?
Could abuse co-exist with Jesus'
teachings regarding the leadership practices of the Pharisees (Matthew
23)?
- Abusers may focus
on the deep frustration and
hurt of abused people and call it "bitterness." This makes them the
issue instead of the abuser's behavior and can send the entire church
into confusion. The abuser may know that if he
can get others to see how "everybody has sinned" then he is more likely
to escape consequences for his abusive behavior.
- Abusers
may have a group of influential supporters in positions of subordinate
leadership that provide favorable treatment. They engage in a quid pro
quo (this for that) type of relationship that works something like
this: the supporters deflect all concerns raised and even do
counter-attacks on questioners as needed, and the top leader in turn
persistently endorses the positions of influence of these influential
members. When there are no checks and balances but rather favoritism,
honest and legitimate questions somehow never make it anywhere.
- Abusers
can appeal to the concept of grace and expect forgiveness for what
they have done, without ever acknowledging wrongdoing. However,
forgiveness demands that the offense be recognized as sin-- if
something isn't a sin, there is nothing to forgive. What abusers
often mean by "forgiveness" and "grace" is a lack of accountability for
what
they have done, that past events simply be re-written or expunged from
history. If such "grace" and "forgiveness" are not given, abusers or
their unwitting defenders will speak about how "we all need to forgive
one another and if we can't do that, we're not very Christian."
- Abusers can
implicitly or explicitly threaten
staff members. Staff members will know that if they raise questions or
object to certain behavior, their positions are in jeopardy. Therefore,
staff members may defend the top leader or the system out of
intimidation or self-interest. This doesn't mean that staff members who
defend the top
leader are corrupted, but the possibility of compromise has to be
considered.
- Abusers can say if
they are disciplined or
removed for their actions, then who will lead the church? This is an
attempt to blackmail the church.
- Amazingly, abusers
may position themselves as the solution to any problems that their
behavior has caused. For example, if the church is discouraged by the
results of their behavior, they will claim that if they were given free
reign they could encourage the church.
What
Really Matters
Of course--
what matters is
not all of these diversions, but what actually happened. Do not let
diversions obscure the facts.
Recently, a teacher from my daughter's high
school was arrested for
assault. He is alleged to have struck a student with a meter stick
(that's a metric yardstick for us older folks). Here's the story
in a local newspaper. Now this teacher has taught thousands of students
over his career. Many probably found him helpful and inspiring, and
there
are probably thousands of students that he didn't hit with a meter
stick. But that doesn't mean this particular incident didn't happen or
that there shouldn't be consequences for the action.
It is
sad, but sometimes the world has a better sense of justice and
righteousness than
the church. Can you imagine
hearing
some of these excuses mentioned above in a court of law? "Yes,
your
honor, the
defendant is accused of murdering the victim. But there were hundreds
of people that he clearly did
not murder. So how could he have committed this murder? Therefore, we
move for a dismissal of the charges." This might sound absurd, but this
kind of thing happens in unhealthy and abusive church situations all
the time.
Does God
Sometimes Use Abuse for Good?
This is a hard section to write. I'm not condoning abuse, and I
don't believe God condones it in the least. But God sometimes uses
abusive people or situations for good. The story of Joseph in Genesis
is a primary example from the Scriptures. Romans 8:28 also comes to
mind-- God works all things for the good of those who love him.
Personally, I was baptized in an abusive
church, though I didn't see the abuse. Later on, God used abusive
treatment directed towards me to break me of my abusive approach to
ministry and leadership.
Abusive churches or individuals may do many good things. However, we
must be very
careful to attribute good results from abusive
situations or
behavior to God and not the abuse. That is-- "God used an abusive
church to reach me," not "an abusive church reached me for God." Don't
give
abuse credit for God's work. Doing evil so that good may result is not
of God:
Why not
say--as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim
that we say--"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation
is deserved. (Romans 3:8)
The Body
Must "Wise Up" About Abuse and Deal With it Righteously
I've only briefly touched on my personal experiences with abuse. I've
been the naive one, the abuser, the abused, the defender, the one
trying to bring about change in the "right way" and the advocate for
the abused. I've participated in this abuse thing
from just about every possible angle. Now, I seek to help the church
address
this problem. One of the goals of The Barnabas Ministry is to educate
people
about this phenomenon and give them tools to recover from it and
address it.
So here's some straight talk about what to do about abuse.
- Learn to love the
truth and seek the truth. Mistreatment or
abuse might be an
ugly truth-- but if it is the truth, it demands action. The church
cannot just look the other way.
- Both those who are
abused or mistreated and those who can't
even conceive that there is a problem with mistreatment or abuse need
to
recognize that each other exist, and neither one is lying. This is a
critical step if a church is going to be able to address the problem
effectively.
- Everybody involved
must sort out the good
from bad and not succumb to
black and white thinking-- that something or someone is either all good
or all bad. This is an act of maturity.
- Do not think that
those who received such treatment are different from you. Just because it
hasn’t happened to you
personally doesn’t mean
it hasn’t happened. Don't kid
yourself-- if
it can
happen to anyone, it can happen to you. In fact, you could be next!
- If you are not on
staff or in some form of
leadership, you probably won't see the abuse.
- Abuse can flourish
on a staff, because people
would have to quit their job to get away from it. Leaving isn't an easy
option, especially to those with children or those who have limited
career options.
- If
you are friends with or loyal to someone accused of mistreating others
and you
yourself haven't been mistreated, can you look at the
allegations objectively? Do you love the truth more than your
friend?
- Ethical, godly
ministers don't deliberately abuse any
people. And if they should
mistreat anybody, they will be terribly sorry for having done so.
- The
church cannot demonize those who report mistreatment. What kind of church culture
is
it when the mistreated or abused are
ostracized for reporting it?
- Those who have been
mistreated or abused by those in
positions of spiritual authority often suffer
terrible damage and scars that can stay with them for years, perhaps
even for life. Do not minimize or underestimate how hurtful and
damaging this is to people and to a church.
- If you have been
mistreated or abused by someone in
spiritual authority, get some help. Another minister might not seem
like an attractive option-- if that's the case, consider a secular
counselor that a trusted minister or friend might recommend.
- People who report
mistreatment or abuse are
risking their entire identity in the organization.It takes a lot
of
courage to bring these matters forward-- these people love truth and
the church more than the
approval of others. These people are heroes, not
villains. They deserve respect, support and love, not to be torn
down or have their motives questioned.
- People who leave
the church staff reporting
mistreatment should be listened to. They have seen the inner workings,
and have effectively committed
professional suicide by speaking up and leaving. Their testimony comes
with a
real and significant cost that cannot be ignored.
- Churches need
explicit policies addressing
spiritual abuse. Church staffs and lay leaders should be regularly
trained in spiritual
abuse awareness, just as secular companies train employees about sexual
harassment and discrimination.
- Every
church needs a clear process in place for addressing these issues
quickly and fairly. If at all possible, unbiased/uninvolved but
spiritually mature parties
should investigate these matters (1 Corinthians 6:4, Galatians 6:2).
- If abuse or
mistreatment is proven, abusers
should be relieved of their duties immediately and the matter more
thoroughly investigated. Depending upon the severity, dismissal and/or
church discipline may be in order.
- The body
does a
grave disservice to
abusers when it is not uniformly resolute in addressing the problem.
Abusers need the truth about their behavior to ever have a chance to
change and heal.
- Reconciliation can
sometimes take place
between the abuser and the abused, but it may take a long time.
- Abusers can be
forgiven, but neither
reconciliation nor forgiveness should be confused with re-establishing
the trust necessary for
spiritual leadership. Trust that is broken takes a long time and a
track record of trustworthy behavior to be restored.
- Abusers should be
helped once they admit the abuse and recognize the need for help. Most
abusers have been abused in
the past. For example, I later came to find out that the lead minister
who abused me was abused
himself in his own ministry training.
- Abusers need
straight talk, not coddling
or excuse-making by
defenders who
will speak
about all the good they've done, ignore the facts of abuse or play
politics with the issue.
- Some abusers may
have serious needs
that are manifesting themselves in their objectionable behavior. This
is a concept beyond the scope of this article but it is discussed in "Overcoming
the Dark Side of Leadership" by Gary L. McIntosh and Samuel L.
Rima.)
For the church or its leadership to look the
other way on matters of abuse and mistreatment is utterly, unbelievably
unconscionable. The weak among God's people cry out to leaders and the
church for justice and protection. It is their obligation to act on
behalf of the mistreated:
Blessed is
he who has regard for the weak; the Lord delivers him in times of
trouble. (Psalm 41:1)
Defend the cause of the weak
and fatherless; maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed. (Psalm
82:3)
You have not
strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You
have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have
ruled them harshly and brutally. (Ezekiel 34:4)
When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were
harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. (Matthew 9:36)
The Lord answered, "Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the
master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance
at the proper time? It will be good for that servant whom the master
finds doing so when he returns. I tell you the truth, he will put him
in charge of all his possessions. But suppose the servant says to
himself, `My master is taking a long time in coming,' and he then
begins to beat the menservants and maidservants and to eat and drink
and get drunk. The master of that servant will come on a day when he
does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him
to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers. (Luke 12:42-46)
Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up
your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's
way. (Romans 14:13)
... so that there
should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal
concern for each other. If one
part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every
part rejoices with it. (1 Corinthians 12:25-26)
We put no stumbling block in anyone's path, so that our ministry will
not be discredited. (2 Corinthians 6:3)
Who is weak, and I do
not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn? (2
Corinthians
11:29)
Remember those in prison as if you were their fellow prisoners,
and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering.
(Hebrews 13:3)
It is my hope that
wherever you are in relation to spiritual
mistreatment and abuse you will find this useful in broadening your
understanding of this topic.