One of the projects I am working on with Beacon Hill and The House Studio is a new book about evangelical leaders’ obsession with leadership. A key premise in the book has to do not with the need to eliminate leadership but to eliminate the way we define it and practice it. In one section, I address what I call “leadership immunity.” It is a play off the idea of diplomatic immunity, which gives a foreign official immunity from certain laws and statutes in his or her host country.
Movies and TV shows have shown countless portrayals of evil foreign diplomats getting away with egregious crimes under the cloak of diplomatic immunity—but the same thing happens across the fields of evangelical churches today. Many pastors and high-ranking church leaders exhibit attitudes that are not like the One they claim to follow and treat those on their staffs in ways that are far from Christ-like, but nobody speaks up. Why? Because their church is doing “great” or their books are bestsellers. Or because he or she is the “Senior” Pastor or “Executive” Pastor—titles I am still trying to find in the Bible. Additionally, especially in charismatic circles, leaders get a free pass when they are found to be involved in some of the most egregious of sins. These leaders skate by because they are “God’s anointed.”
It is past time that we pull the leadership immunity passport from the hands of us all. It is time that Jesus’ revolutionary concept of leader as servant ceases to be a slogan we salute and instead becomes a status we live by.
I completely agree with your take on leadership in the church. Why do you think this phenomenon exists? Is it that modern church leadership has so drank the Maxwell cool-aid of “everything depends on leadership”, or is there something cultural going on?
Jeff,
I believe there are several factors that have created this perfect storm of leader, leader, leader. Not the least of which is the “everything rises or falls on leadership” ala, Maxwell. His “irrefutable laws” need a lot of refuting. Culturally, we love a white knight…etc., we love the myth of Clint Eastwoods and Indiana Jones’s who can come in rescue us all. And worst of all we have just flat out ignored Jesus and “it will not be this way among you.”
I’ve been processing this a little since yesterday. The times I’ve created a culture in which leadership immunity existed my actions were driven by ambition. I cloaked it in ambition for the kingdom (a.k.a. ambition for church growth), but honestly there was a lot of personal ambition tied in there as well. In the back of my heart was the understanding that if the church grew it was because of my leadership, because I was “being used by God”. “I’m not awesome. God is just using me in awesome ways….which, you know what…is awesome.”
Well said, my friend. As is my wont to proclaim, the issue isn’t leadership, it’s discipleship. I wonder how many of these immunity demanding leaders were ever properly discipled/mentored. (I know that I was not, so…)
Yep. You know I agree wholeheartedly with you that the bottom line is the failure to make disciples via inviting to join in life on life, not via preaching (which it cannot do).
Servant and slave rulership are the terms Mark uses when he cites Jesus (Mark 10:41-45). Looking forward to your book, as I have seen that too many church leaders have a fastidious fascination with American business and sports models of “leadership.”
Well said Lance. I think the “glow” left by charismatic personalities plays a lot into this. We associate them with the “glory” and give them way too much “weight” than they actually possess. I think this is why Paul was keen on talking about his weakness and suffering. It deflects attention off of him and onto the weight/glory/glow of the the Lord II Cor 3:18.
Bravo, my friend! Sounds like a “must read” and I’m in. We may need to sit and talk about abusive leadership. Spiritual abuse in particular. Peace…
I think that your also touching on this idea that somehow we can “engineer” our “churches”. Like, if we can only find the “correct” system and implement it just right… we will have this wonderfully neat and established “church organization”.
This is truly part of a hangover from modernity…
Right on target. The very definition of leadership that we are told is the portrait of success is not found in the Bible at all! At least, not in the positive side…
It has a lot to do with the corporate brain-washing, as you already know. Our imaginations are captivated by corporate America and not the church in Acts.
It gets manifested in a lot of axiomatic speech like “everyone needs to pull in the same direction” that comes from Maxwell and his disciples and not from Jesus or his disciples. It gets manifested in the notion of “strong leadership” which ends up smothering the diverse expressions of gifts and calls (like APEST) that Christ has given the church.
The thing is, I’m not against leadership being culturally defined — that is, right up until the point that it ceases being Scriptural or looking like Jesus. A lot of good leadership going forward is going to be modeled after our context’s best ideas about leadership. That’s just good missional strategy, and it’s what leaders were doing when they followed Maxwell. The problem is they’ve often gone too far, and the two paradigms they won’t to mix just don’t mix.
In my own experience, the hardest thing I had to work out was when I had crossed the line of Biblical unity and submission, when I could no longer agree with the leadership paradigms of our “senior” and “executive” leaders. (And they actually used those very titles.) This is still important. I am passionate about these very important questions you are raising, but I don’t want to be cynical and I don’t want to be a bull in a china shop.
Pingback: The Real UK Interview - Was it of the Undisciplined or Undiscipled?
I wholeheartedly agree, Lance. Your metaphor is helpful. We need to pull the plug on immunity for those who demonstrate themselves to be “malignant ministers.” No one should get a “virtual pass” for ministry malfeasance, even if he or she is a Christian celebrity. Period. Leadership is based primarily on Christlike character and biblical wisdom, not on mere giftedness or skill level. The very idea of immunity from responsibility for a so-called leaders’ faulty character, teaching, and/or relating goes against the spirit and letter of every list of leadership qualifications in the New Testament epistles, doesn’t it? De fide!
But there is also the larger system of players to consider here. They reinforce bad leaders through their own “pastoral malfeasance” and “authority malpractice.” Since they are at least partially responsible for the public creation of these “emissaries,” they hold at least some responsibility for the results. So, I suggest we assign partial culpability to those who, in essence, issue and endorse the “passport” of malignant ministers. For instance:
* Degrees and certifications issued by seminaries and training programs are frequently used as evidence of capability and qualification to minister. They are also tacit endorsements of their graduates’ character. So, seminaries and other training programs that issue degrees but fail to assess and redress the spiritual maturity of a candidate for graduation as part of the degree requirements should be partially liable for damages caused by those they graduate.
* Apostles / prophets / leaders of movements often lay hands on someone to identify him/her as capable and qualified for public ministry, and/or have otherwise testified on the record as to that person’s qualifications to serve. Their endorsement is the equivalent of granting a diplomatic position for the protégé to serve as their emissary. Thus, they should be complicit for any emotional damages and/or physical harm caused by those they endorsed.
* The founders / directors / staff of the main campus in a multi-campus church should be held spiritually, ethically, and legally responsible for any/all ministry misconduct perpetrated at any campus in their system.
* Non-profit boards / executives / staff; publishing house executives / staff / shareholders; conference organizers / staff / shareholders should be held spiritually, ethically, and legally responsible for partial damages due to ministry misconduct perpetrated by one of their employees, endorsees, speakers, authors.
* Any corporation that does not publicly repair the damage inflicted by their protégés should be liable for multiplied damages.
Would these entities be more appropriately cautious about “laying on of hands” if there were bottom-line consequences to such actions?
In the future, I should not be at all surprised to see civil suits filed to hold accountable both the perpetrators of malignant ministry AND those who actively enabled/empowered the perpetrators by giving them a wider avenue of public influence or passively allowed infliction of damage to occur. In our American system, corporations are considered “persons,” aren’t they? I say, give no “virtual pass” for the corporate persons that broadcast their endorsement of someone who turns out to be a malignant minister. In your terms, remove their “immunity.”
Because of separation of church and state, these suits may not fly, but the point is still valid. So there could at least be online campaigns to present evidence that publicly shames these enablers of abuse and calls them to account, and suggests consequences to impose (e.g., don’t buy their books, go to their events, invite them to speak, etc.)
(And yes, I understand about not filing suits against fellow Christians. However, these are businesses, even if they are churches – - they are not the Church. If they are truly Christian, wouldn’t they take responsibility for their actions/inactions and the damages caused thereby? They shouldn’t claim christianity when it’s to their advantage but not claim responsibility to the Body when it costs them.)
The thing is, in an increasingly online world, the virtual universe of evidence of these actions/inactions cannot be erased. Citizen journalists who act as whistleblowers can do so responsibly, with vast research in hand … because so much is now at our googletips on the internet. So – the stage is set for identifying, confronting, and otherwise holding accountable those who share responsibility for creating Christian celebrities that prove themselves to be *UNqualified* for ministry due to immaturity or *DISqualified* from ministry due to malignancy.
Lance
Agree much with your thoughts about…
“evangelical leaders’ obsession with leadership.” And – “Leadership Immunity.”
Can’t find many “evangelical leaders” quoting Jesus as He taught His Disciples
NOT to be called “Leaders” – For you have “ONE” leader – the Christ.
And NONE did… NOT one “Disciple of Christ” called themselves “Leader.”
In the Bible, ALL “Disciples of Christ” called themselves “Servants.”
When making “Disciples of Christ” aren’t we to teach what Jesus taught?
Mat 28:19:20 NKJV
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
**teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you**
And jesus taught “His Disciples” NOT to be called “Leader.”
New American Standard Bible – Mat 23:10-12.
Do not be called leaders; for “ONE” is your Leader, that is, Christ.
But the greatest among you shall be your *servant.*
Whoever *exalts himself* shall be humbled;
and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.
The Message – Mat 23:10-12.
And don’t let people maneuver you into taking charge of them.
There is only one Life-Leader for you and them—Christ.
**Do you want to stand out? – Then step down. – Be a servant.**
If you puff yourself up, you’ll get the wind knocked out of you.
But if you’re content to simply be yourself, your life will count for plenty.
Hmmm? If someone calls them self a “Leader,”
and they allow others to call them “Leader,”
ignoring what Jesus taught His Disciples…
Are they a “Disciple of Christ?” ;-(
Or – Just a disobediant “Disciple of Christ?”
Jesus humbled Himself, made Himself of NO reputation,
and took on the form of a “Servant.” Phi2:7-8.
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall “hear My voice; “
and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
John 10:16
One Fold – One Shepherd – One Voice – One Leader
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
As a leader, I have much to learn, I like what I read in this post and will be looking forward to your book. Do you have a timetable for when it will be available?
Jim,
The book will be out this fall. Thanks for asking.