Chapter 1

Unerring Leadership

One of the first characteristics to emerge in an unhealthy Christian group is the tendency to view its leadership as above reproach or censure. Although this tendency shows itself early in the group’s development, its growth is so slow and gradual that it isn’t easily detected. Only when it’s deeply entrenched in the minds of both the leadership and the group’s members can it be seen for what it is.

Important questions need to be asked about how the leader—the pastor or teacher—of the group is viewed. (For the sake of convenience, I’ll refer to this leader as an individual. However, a team of leaders can also fall into this trap.) Is the leader seen as a servant of the people in the group, a man gifted to lead but not necessarily “better” spiritually than anyone else in the congregation? Or is he perceived as some kind of spiritual giant—an awesome figure—who is respected as the final judge of all spiritual matters?

This latter perception need not be the result of what the leader actually says. He may speak in a truly humble manner, frequently confessing his spiritual failings before God. What’s important is not what is said, but rather how the people in the congregation relate to him. Very rarely would a truly Christian man openly proclaim his own righteousness or worthiness to be followed, as the cult leader Jim Jones did at People’s Temple.

What’s more likely to be develop in a Christian setting is the emergence of a small group of people near the leader who promote his “super spiritual” image for him. To question or disagree with one of his proclamations may not solicit any reaction on the part of the leader. After all, he is aware that 2 Timothy 2:24 says “the servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition.” But the loyal group around him will react quickly to such “insubordination” and try to shame the member into silence.

Probably the saddest aspect of this unhealthy view of leadership is how Scripture is twisted to suit the whims of men. Unlike a full-fledged cult, these groups rarely misinterpret the Bible outright. Their error is in how a Scripture is stretched to make a point. Their overemphasis distorts to some extent the meaning that should be applied when balanced with other Scripture.

Admittedly, judgments like these take great insight that often comes only with Christian maturity. Young Christians may not have the necessary experience in handling Scripture to make that kind of call. This is why they must rely upon the Holy Spirit to alert them in such instances. Often an older, more experienced Christian who’s not connected with the unhealthy group can offer an objective perspective about the situation and help the young Christian sort out the excesses and distortions in the teaching. Such godly advice confirms the “check” from the Holy Spirit that the young believer has been feeling. Then he can pray about the best course of action to take.

The Lord’s Anointed

A verse often quoted in groups with an unbalanced or unhealthy view of leadership is 1 Samuel 24:6. David, God’s choice for Israel’s king, was running for his life from King Saul and his men. When David and his band of men arrive at a cave in En-gedi, they can’t believe their good fortune—Saul is there, sound asleep, and is unguarded. David snips off a small piece of Saul’s robe and withdraws, even though his men press him to go ahead and kill Saul while he has the chance. But David responds: “The Lord forbid that I should do this thing to my master, the Lord’s anointed, to stretch out my hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the Lord.”

David’s heart was right in this matter. He had confidence that God would deliver the nation’s kingdom into his hand when the time was right. He knew it would be wrong to take matters into his own hands. It’s interesting that after he cut the piece from Saul’s robe “David’s heart troubled him.” In his spirit he knew that what he had done was wrong. God is faithful to lead us by His Spirit if we’re open to Him.

There’s nothing wrong with the interpretation of this passage in regard to not taking something from the anointed of God unlawfully. But what’s often done in unhealthy groups takes it a step further. They use this verse to justify any action on the part of the leader as above reproach and censorship simply because he is the leader—God’s anointed. That’s stretching the point too far.

Evangelicals are quick to criticize Roman Catholicism because of its hierarchical religious system and its idea that the Pope, though a man, speaks unerringly as the very voice of God on spiritual matters. Yet I have heard this verse in 1 Samuel 24 and the one in 1 Chronicles 16:22 quoted in much the same way in some evangelical groups. Any questioning of teaching, or disagreement with conduct, raises the cry of “touching the Lord’s anointed.”

Using the verse in this way creates a smokescreen, allowing leaders to do whatever they like without having to answer to anyone else. It may be appealing from a leader’s perspective, but it is thoroughly unbiblical. After David became king, he fell into sin with Bathsheba, another man’s wife. No one said a word to him because, after all, he was king!

God eventually sent a very brave prophet to confront David with the accusation, “Thou art the man!” Nathan had no idea if David would hear him out and repent, or if he would order his head to be cut off. All he knew was that his primary loyalty was to God, since he was His servant. So he obeyed the directive to speak to David about his sin, regardless of the consequences.

This is an important principle for all of us to remember. We don’t answer to men and we shouldn’t look to them for our approval, if it comes at the cost of pleasing the Lord. As Paul pointed out, “with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself, yet I am not justified by this; but He who judges me is the Lord” (1 Corinthians 4:3-4).

Each member of the Lord’s body, whether he’s in a position of leadership or not, needs ministry from other members of His body. If there’s no avenue for correction, rebuke, or instruction from another, the leader is destined to become more and more capricious, demanding, and unbalanced as time goes on. For his sake, as well as the sake of those he leads, there must be the opportunity to respectfully question and disagree with his actions and policies.

Respectful Disagreement

The word respectively is important, because another scriptural principle brings balance to the relationship between leader and group member. Paul instructs the believers in Thessalonica to “recognize those who labor among you, and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake. Be at peace among yourselves” (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13). The writer to the Hebrews reminds us why we need to esteem our leaders highly: “They watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you” (Hebrews 13:17).

In other words, don’t make trouble for your leaders because of your own sin. Honor and submit to them whenever it is appropriate to do so, and if you need to question something about their manner of life or leadership style, do so with love and respect. In a healthy Christian group, this is relatively easy to do. Those who rule well are “counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine” (1 Timothy 5:17). It’s in unhealthy groups that this relationship begins to break down. Leaders who don’t rule well tend to bully and intimidate those they rule over. Unchecked, they become emotional tyrants. Seeing themselves as more spiritually enlightened than anyone else, they become arrogant and unwilling to learn from anyone else.

A.W. Tozer, in his essay “On Receiving Admonition,” pointed out the dangers of growth and success in Christian ministry. “Success itself becomes the cause of later failure. The leaders come to accept themselves as the very chosen of God. They therefore must be right, and anyone who tries to call them to account is instantly written off as an unauthorized meddler who should be ashamed to dare to reprove his betters.”[1]

Jesus is the standard by which leaders should measure themselves as they carry out ministry in His body. He came, not to be served, but to serve others in humility and submission to His Father. One of His disciples, Peter, watched Him carefully and later wrote: “The elders who are among you I exhort, I who am a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ. … Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by constraint but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock; and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away. Likewise you younger people, submit yourselves to your elders. Yes, all of you be submissive to one another, and be clothed with humility, for ‘God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble’” (1 Peter 5:1-5).

In the body of Christ, mutual submission will help to keep our roles and relationships balanced and healthy. If submission is always expected to be in one direction—from members to the leader—something is wrong. Leaders need those who will bring correction to their lives too. Yes, we should approach them with our questions and concerns in a respectful way. Yes, we should pray for them and support them in their role as much as we possibly can. But when they become abusive, unapproachable, isolated, and arrogant in how they lead, the Lord expects us to do something. To let it continue unchecked means we give tacit approval to what is happening.

When I became a Christian, I joined a group that was led by a very gifted older Bible teacher. His knowledge of the Bible was truly awesome to me, and I felt privileged to sit under his instruction. Most of what he taught was thoroughly biblical and many of the truths he imparted I still carry with me to this day.

There were certain points, however, that didn’t sit right with me, even as a young Christian. I would walk away from the meetings feeling like I could never measure up to my full potential in Christ’s body, since I was a female and therefore of less importance than my male counterparts. The teachers didn’t say that in so many words, of course, but that was the impression I got when they shared anything about church order. I was asked to keep my head covered as a sign of my submission, not only to my husband but also to the other men in our congregation. And I was to keep quiet in our worship meetings, even if I felt prompted by the Holy Spirit to offer an insight or a prayer.

This was very confusing to me, especially since our group claimed to be charismatic, operating under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. On the one hand, everyone was encouraged to participate in the service as they felt led, but there was another message being passed that definitely favored male participation.

For months I agonized about what to do about this. I felt so blessed by the fellowship of the group that I didn’t want to threaten my acceptance by them. But I was also very aware that I needed to obey the Lord above any person, so I didn’t want to ignore the clear leading of the Spirit to share when I felt prompted. Which of the two conflicting messages should I accept, I wondered. Did the Lord really value men more than women? Or was this teaching just a hold-over from our leader’s own spiritual past, some “old wine” that was being forced into “new bottles”?

It was hard for me to sort these things out, and my husband and I spent many hours pouring over the New Testament writings to try to determine what was the greater spiritual truth being communicated by the early church leaders and praying for the Lord to give His wisdom about what would most honor Him. We had to come to our own conclusions about this because the teaching elders refused to acknowledge the contradiction. They assumed we would bow to their superior knowledge about the Bible and not question their judgments, even if the Holy Spirit was not witnessing the truth of their teaching to our hearts.

I remember there were specific scriptures given to me during this time that I felt led to share with the church leadership. I made arrangements to meet with them on the night they regularly met, and obediently shared what I had been given without comment. I figured if the Lord wanted to get their attention, He could speak through the passages themselves better than I could try to interpret them.

The texts (James 3:14-18, 5:9; Galatians 5:14-15; Proverbs 13:10) were concerned with why we were having contention in our group—something we had not had in the beginning of our relationship—and how it would eventually tear our congregation apart and harm all of us in one way or another. The elders politely listened to me but gave no real attention to what I had brought. Within minutes I was on my way, feeling sad for the consequences I knew would follow from their spiritual pride and arrogance. But at the same time I felt like the burden had been shifted off of me because I had “delivered the goods” as the Lord has instructed.

Within a year that once vibrant and spiritually healthy congregation of born-again believers had been torn apart and scattered. A few of the core group stuck it out and continued to meet together, but the vast majority left. Most of them continued to serve the Lord in other congregations, but some left the faith entirely, disillusioned and angry that what had started out so wonderfully had ended in such division and discord. I’m sure the devil had lots of fun pointing out the hypocrisy of it all and assuring them that the whole experience had been a colossal waste of time.  

There’s a tremendous difference between respectful support and unquestioning loyalty. Distinguishing between them is vital, because one fosters healthy interaction within the body and the other contributes to an unhealthy atmosphere of intimidation and censure. When imbalance begins to manifest itself in your group, don’t sit back and wait for it to get worse. Pray and ask the Lord what you should do, and then bravely do it.

No leader or group of leaders in God’s kingdom is above being respectfully questioned or challenged. The prophet Nathan is our example in this. He was careful to put his loyalty to God above any earthly teacher. If you see the attitude among your leaders of being wiser than the rest of the body, above correction or censure by “lesser” members, or more important to the functioning of the group than everyone else, beware. Such unhealthy views will likely manifest in other ways as well. We’ll continue to explore them in the following chapters.

---

[1] A.W. Tozer, The Best of A.W. Tozer, edited by Warren W. Wiersbe (Harrisburg: Christian Publications, Inc., 1981), 124 (italics added)

Advertisement