A friend of mine who's
living in Taiwan posted up some articles up on the topic of unhealthy/abusive
churches. I think these articles are interesting to read. These things seem to
happen more easily in authoritarian collectivist cultures such as the Chinese
culture (it may even be seen as the norm!)... but can potentially happen
anywhere!! After all, leading is no easy task, and people are not paid to go to
church, so if a church is not operating by the power of God, it is probably
kept running by human manipulation. The things described are really
traps which any leaders can fall into! It's not easy to get people to move from point A to point B... but if people are pushed/manipulated into moving, then it's not true transformation, and once they are out of the environment, they will naturally revert back to point A (just like the story of Nehemiah, where a physical wall was rebuilt but people's hearts were unchanged).
Characteristics of
Unhealthy, Abusive and Cultic Church Environments:
Abusive churches:
Abusive Churches: Leaving Them Behind – A Biblical Perspective:
Unhealthy/Abusive church
situations:
1. Institutional Pride: The system is never the problem. If something
goes good, the system gets credit for it. But if something goes bad, the system
is not at fault, but rather some individual gets blamed for it. If anyone
identifies problems with the system, that person will be marginalized, put down
and discredited. Nobody is good enough to criticize the system. The church may
consider itself the best church or perhaps the One True Church, meaning no
others are saved. However, when pressed about its own shortcomings, the group
may reluctantly admit that "no church is perfect" and say it is
"changing," but do substantive changes that would improve the health
of the group ever take place?
2. Exploitative: The system uses the people, often abusing them with
harsh and demanding treatment. People serve the system and its agenda, not God
(indeed, the agenda of the church is equated with God's agenda). Though
deliberate efforts are made to make the group meetings appear
"fired-up" or joyful, on the inside the people feel sad and trapped.
3. Leader-centric. Because leaders are the custodians of the system,
they are considered superior and often isolate themselves from the members.
Leaders usually lead by control and authority, not by nurturing or humble
service. Getting closer to the leaders relationally or in the leadership
"pyramid" is a goal and sign of advancement in the system; real
spirituality and spiritual growth may not be important objectives at all.
Subordinate leaders may be more genuine in their faith and approach, but they
can be replaced at any time. Look at the highest levels of leadership to see
the true values of the church.
4. Manipulative. The objective of leaders is to advance the system, not
to do what is best for individuals. Thus, leadership direction that is given to
members is biased towards what is best for the system, not the individual. For
example, members may be discouraged from moving simply because the leader loses
stature (and maybe even his position or salary) if his membership decreases.
Leaders may use a call for "unity" to insist that everyone
participate in some event or action, warping the Scriptural idea of unity.
Failing to conform will lead to shaming and charges of being
"independent," "unteachable" or "not a real
disciple." Leaders may draw people close to them with encouragement one
minute, then tell them they are terrible the next. This is a control ritual
that is designed to make people perform in order to get the praise of the
leadership. But alas, the member can never do enough to guarantee that praise;
no matter what he does the leader can find something wrong with it if he is so
inclined.
5. Dishonest: The system does not communicate straight. Communications
are ambiguous or vague, events are "spun" the way the leadership
wants to present them. Pertinent information is hidden from members. Straight
answers are not given; different people may be told different things.
Dishonesty may show up in deceptive recruiting or leaving incorrect but
favorable impressions uncorrected. Finances may be kept secret, with misleading
financial statements that hide where the money really goes. There might be
front organizations and secret doctrines or practices that are not normally
revealed to outsiders. Frankly, there is so much dishonesty in unhealthy and
abusive churches that people may not even know they are being dishonest. The
ability to "spin" things to make the system look better or to get
people to conform becomes a second language to members.
6. Law or Performance Orientation. This is not the normal obedience
that accompanies Christian faith (Romans 1:5), but a whole system where certain
behaviors are rewarded and others are punished. Rewards may include salaries,
perks, position or status in the system. It is true that there is right and
wrong behavior in Christianity; the problem with an unhealthy system is that
they have a closely-held subset of values superimposed upon truly scriptural
Christian values. Other virtues go ignored or might even be punished, and other
sins may be ignored or even encouraged. This may even result in a
"poisoned well" where even good things become corrupt at the motive
level because the perception of performance is so important. For example,
members may want to lead others to Christ in order to advance in the system,
not so that converts will be saved. Members might read the Bible daily so they
can say they did it if challenged, not because they are actually wanting to
learn something. Actions in unhealthy and abusive churches are often motivated
by selfish ambition, compulsion, guilt or the desire to avoid trouble with
leaders, not by faith, love, grace or concern about God. The possibility of
being shamed publicly or in front of one's peers for any failure manipulates
people to work their hardest in doing what the leaders tell them and to avoid
getting on their bad side.
7. Thwarts Individual Growth: The objective of the system is to glorify
the system and maintain dependency upon the leadership, not to train members
into mature spiritual adults. Unhealthy systems continue to treat even mature
Christians as though they were children. The system short-cuts growth by
demanding certain behaviors without concern for the correct motivation or
spiritual depth. Then it points to that behavior to glorify itself.
There is a kernel of truth behind almost all abuses, and churches are
good at using certain scriptures to support their positions. The problem isn't
the kernel of truth, the problem is when these things get out of balance or get
warped to an extreme. These problems may not be seen until a system is in place
for several years and its long-term fruit is seen in the destruction of people
that have been a part of the system. Unhealthy churches may have problems with
some of these issues I've discussed. Abusive churches will have more severe,
deliberate and intransigent problems with these issues.
Discerning Good from Abusive:
How do we discern a healthy church from an abusive church?
Unfortunately, abusive churches can exist in evangelical and mainline
denominations. They are not just fringe churches on the outer circle of
evangelicalism. Churches that can be labeled “spiritually abusive” range from
mildly abusive–churches with sporadic abusive practices–to the severe cases of
being manipulative and controlling. Here are some questions that can help show
if you are in an unhealthy situation.
First, does the leadership invite dialogue, advice, evaluation, and
questions from outside its immediate circle? Authoritarian pastors are
threatened by any diverse opinions whether from inside or outside the group.
Group members are discouraged from asking hard questions. The rule is, don’t
ask questions and don’t make waves. A healthy pastor welcomes even tough
questions, whereas in an unhealthy church disagreement with the pastor is
considered disloyalty and is virtually equal to disobeying God. Spiritual
language is used to disguise the manipulation that is going on. Questioners are
labeled rebellious, insubordinate, and disruptive to the harmony of the body.
Attempts are made to shut them down. The only way to succeed is to go along
with the agenda, support the leaders, scorn those who disagree.
Second, is there a system of accountability or does the pastor keep
full control? Authoritarian pastors do not desire a system of accountability.
They may have a board but it consists of yes-men whom he ultimately selects.
Third, does a member’s personality generally become stronger, happier,
and more confident as a result of being with the group? The use of guilt, fear,
and intimidation is likely to produce members with low self-esteem. Many are
beaten down by legalism, while assertiveness is a sign that one is not
teachable and therefore not spiritual.
Fourth, are family commitments strengthened? Church obligations are
valued more than family ones. Although many may verbally acknowledge the family
as a priority, in practice they do not act like it. My colleagues at Probe, Don
and Deanne, know of a mother who needed to gain special permission from her
church to attend her son’s wedding because it conflicted with a church event.
The church made her feel guilty because she was choosing family over God. In
another case, I know of women who missed their son and daughter’s prom night to
attend a church meeting which was held twenty minutes from their homes. The
mindset is loyalty to God means loyalty to his church. One’s spiritual quality
is determined by one’s allegiance to the church.
Fifth, does the group encourage independent thinking, developing
discernment skills, and creation of new ideas? Abusive churches resort to using
pressure to have followers conform, and there is a low tolerance for any kind
of difference in belief (of a non-essential nature) and behavior. There is a
legalistic emphasis on keeping the rules, and a need to stay within set
boundaries. Unity is defined as conformity. These leaders evaluate all forms of
Christian spirituality according to their own prescribed system.
Sixth, is the group preoccupied with maintaining a good public image
that does not match the inner circle experience?
Seventh, does the leadership encourage members to foster relations and
connections with the larger society that are more than self-serving? Abusive
churches thrive on tactics that create total dependence on the church while
protecting and isolating themselves from the “sinful” world.
Finally, is there a high rate of burnout among the members? In order to
gain approval or prove you are a “true disciple,” abusive churches require
levels of service that are very taxing.
If these are character traits of the group you are attending, you may
be in an abusive church and should consider leaving the organization.
Profile of an Abusive Leader:
Philip Keller gave us a stern warning in his book, Predators in Our
Pulpits: “The greatest threat to the church today is not from without but from
our own leadership within.” Often an abusive church is built around the
leader who practices some unhealthy forms of shepherding. Many such leaders
come from churches that were abusive or have an unmet need for significance.
Many may have begun with noble intentions, but their unresolved personal issues
cause them to become dependent on their ministry to meet their needs. In his
book, Healing Spiritual Abuse, Ken Blue does an outstanding job identifying
unhealthy leadership. Here are a few characteristics of an abusive leader.
Abusive leaders use their position to demand loyalty and submission.
Ken Blue states, “I have heard many pastors say to their congregations,
‘Because I am the pastor, you must follow me.’ Their demand was not based on
truth or the God-directedness of their leadership but on their title. That is a
false basis of authority . . . any appeal to authority based on position,
title, degree or office is false. The only authority God recognizes and to
which we should submit to is truth.” Other leaders use titles such as
“God’s man” or “the Lord’s anointed” so that others will treat them with
special reverence and keep themselves above accountability that others in the
congregation are held to. “If by appealing to position, unique claims or
special anointings, leaders succeed in creating a hierarchy in the church, they
can more easily control those beneath them. They can also defend themselves
against any who might challenge them.”
One of the lessons from the Bible is that all men and women are
fallible. Therefore, all people, especially leaders, need some form of
accountability. Although pastors are called to lead their congregations, they
are under the authority of God’s Word. When they act in a manner contrary to
Scripture they need to be confronted, and improper behavior needs to be
corrected. In 2 Samuel 22, the prophet Nathan confronted King David about his
sin. In Galatians 2, Paul confronted Peter, the leader of the Apostles, for not
acting in line with the truth. “Paul declared by this action that the truth
always outranks position or title in the church. Truth and its authority are
not rooted in personality or office. It is derived from the word of God and the
truth it proclaims.” Blue continues: “Paul taught that the body of Christ is
a nonhierarchical living organism.”
Instead of feeding and caring for the flock, these pastors feed off the
flock and use them to meet their needs for significance. Ken Blue gives an
example of a “pastor whose church has not grown numerically in twelve years.
Frustrated by his manifest lack of success, he turned to the congregation to
meet his need. He has laid on them a building program in hopes that a new,
larger, more attractive facility will draw more people. The congregation has
split over this issue. Many have left the church, and those who remain are saddled
with the debt.”
I know of other pastors who have chastised their staff and congregation
when they did not show up at a church function. Many members were busy with
family commitments, work, and needed personal time for rest, but were pressured
to attend the numerous church events. These leaders saw their success in the
numbers that attended their functions and needed their turnout to satisfy their
sense of worth.
True spiritual leaders are defined by Christ’s example. “Whoever wants
to be great among you must become the servant of all” (Matt. 20:26).
Christ-like leadership is servanthood.
True leaders gain the loyalty of the sheep because of the quality of
their character and their attitude of servanthood. The members freely submit to
Christ-like leadership and do not have to be coerced to follow. Good shepherds
lighten the load of the sheep while false leaders add to the load on the sheep.
Should you find yourself in such a situation, the first thing to do is
pray for the leader. Second, in a loving and graceful way confront the leader,
addressing what you see as unhealthy practices in his leadership. It may take a
while for your words to sink in, so be patient. However, as in many cases, the
leader may get defensive and reject your advice and in turn make accusations against
you. In such cases realize you were obedient to God, and now you must let the
Lord work on the leader’s heart. James 3:1, Ezekiel 34, and other passages
bring stern warnings that God will judge shepherds who use the sheep to fulfill
their needs and not shepherd God’s flock as a steward. It is best to leave the
situation and let God deal in His way with the leader and his organization.
Healthy
|
Unhealthy or Abusive
|
A place of blessing and refuge for
those in need. A place people want to go. Lives are blessed.
|
A place of slavery. A place people
want to leave. Lives are embittered.
|
Benevolent leadership genuinely
concerned about the welfare of those it leads.
|
Malevolent leadership concerned
about control over those it leads.
|
Leadership concerned about loyalty
to the people.
|
Leadership concerned about the
loyalty of the people.
|
Devotes the system to meet the
needs of the people.
|
Exploits the legitimate needs of
people for its own ends.
|
Leadership builds up the people.
|
Leadership tears down the people.
|
Healthy structure established for
order and taking care of the people. Whole structure works for the good of
all.
|
Unhealthy structure established to
control the people. "In" groups, rivalries, favoritism, rewards and
punishments to ensure loyalty to the leadership and system.
|
Leadership is secure, welcomes
outsiders.
|
Leadership is paranoid, afraid of
outsiders and disloyal members.
|
Contributions made willingly
|
Contributions made under
compulsion.
|
The good of all is what matters.
|
The system and one's position in
it are what matters.
|
The system serves the people.
|
The people serve the system.
|
Leaders serve the people.
|
Leaders control the people.
|
Hardships related to the task at
hand.
|
Hardships arbitrary, inflicted by
the leadership
|
Negative aspects of system
discussed and corrected for the good of the people. People who identify
problems are put in a position to address these needs for the good of all.
|
Negative aspects of system
silenced. People who identify problems are viewed as a threat. They are
marginalized, stigmatized and cast out of the system.
|
Welcomes helpful changes.
|
Resists changes.
|
Prayers of thanksgiving and
praise.
|
Prayers of anguish and pain.
|
God leads people to go there.
|
God leads people to leave there.
|
I’ve decided to send an email to the author of the article on Probe, Dr
Patrick Zukeran… and what a feeling of nostalgia when I received response when
he opened with an “Aloha” (because I lived in Hawaii for 3 years in my early
childhood):
Dear Dr Patrick Zukeran,
I just got a question on the topic of abusive churches. A friend of
mine who's living in Taiwan shared some articles on topic of unhealthy/abusive
churches from the "Probe for answers" website. I think these articles
are interesting to read. These things seem to happen more easily in
authoritarian collectivist cultures such as the Chinese culture (some of the
abusive things listed may even be seen as the norm in such cultures!)... but
can potentially happen anywhere!! After all, leading is no easy task, and
people are not paid to go to church, so if a church is not operating by the
power of God, it is probably kept running by human manipulation. If I were to
evaluate using the criteria listed in the articles on probe, I think many
churches in Taiwan operate unhealthily (especially some of the really big, most
rapidly growing ones). I am just wondering what are your thoughts on this?
Thank you!
Aloha Yvonne,
sorry for the
delay in response, I was out of the country. I would agree that many churches
in Asia may be considered abusive. The Authoritarian style of leadership is
common in Asian churches. I guess it is part of the culture in Asia. I notice
when I teach in Asia I need to teach on what biblical leadership and healthy
churches look like. I worked in Asian churches in the United States under
pastors from Taiwan and Chinese cultures and found them very authoritarian. I
hope a new generation of leaders can learn to lead in a healthy and biblical
way.
yours truly,
Patrick
Zukeran
Evidence and
Answers
