There are church leaders who engage in spiritual abuse to keep people in line with their culture, ethos and expectations. It is wrong, violates Biblical teaching and is deeply dysfunctional. This behavior has a cult like feel to it because it elevates spiritual leaders as those who we need to listen to and obey on issues of personal preference, conscience or decision making.
Here are some signs of spiritual abuse to be sensitive to.
1. When there is a personal disagreement and church leadership ask for repentance on the part of the individual who disagreed. Repentance is called for when we have wronged another or committed an offense against another. Disagreeing with someone else does not constitute sin. It is simply exercising our right to be self defined and a healthy individual. When one is pressured to repent over a disagreement, beware.
2. When you feel pressured to take an action because a church leader or someone else is is telling you should do so based on what "God told them." If God wants to talk to us he is perfectly able to do so. It is fair for others to talk to us about issues they might be concerned about but it is not OK for them to pressure us to take action they think we should take. Using the God card to force others to take action violates individual freedom to listen to their conscience and be sensitive to God themselves.
3. When you are told you are likely in sin because you made a decision that others disagree with. Unless that sin is obvious and clearly in violation of Biblical principles, this is blatent manipulation but of a powerful kind when it comes from a church leader. The mantra is, "I fear you have some deep hidden sin in your life because of the decisions you are making." Don't fall for it.
4. When a church leader tells you what you should do with your life. No one can tell us what to do with our lives except for God and our own desire to follow Him. Many people have a plan for our lives but only we can discern what God wants for our lives.
5. When there is an inordinate focus on "church unity" as a theme that stifles dissenting voices or the ability to speak one's opinion freely. Church unity should never be used to stifle discussions, dialogue or opinions that might differ from those of a church leader or pastor.
The priesthood of all believers means that the Holy Spirit and truth are not the exclusive purview of church leadership. Of course, we need to be respectful and loving when sharing our views but in the absence of truly causing division or heretical teaching, we should be able to do so without recrimination.
Independent thought is a threat in dysfunctional churches because it encourages others to think for themselves. When one takes an alternate view from leaders or the common line, it is a threat to the control of those leaders and is often resisted.
6. When church discipline is threatened for non ongoing egregiousness sin - beware! Church discipline should be a rare event, and the last in a series of steps where there is heresy, division or ongoing egregiousness sin. It should never be threatened or used to bring people into line.
7. When you are pressured to remain in the church if you start to pull away and desire a different fellowship. Cult like organizations like to control and they don't like it when people leave. It is a threat to them because they fear others will take note and consider the same thing. They will do everything they can to bring one back into the fold and may use both woo and threat in the process.
Here is the bottom line. If you feel that your leaders seek to control, to stifle honest dialogue, to manipulate with the God card or make you agree with their point of view, beware. Spiritual abuse is subtle but it is real. Just as abused spouses are duped into thinking the abuser is right so are those abused by those in church leadership positions. The book of Galatians is a good one to read if you feel others are trying to force you into their mold and to live by their rules. There are cults inside the church as well as outside the church.
Showing posts with label abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abuse. Show all posts
Monday, September 24, 2012
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Those who need to control and how to recognize it
I am convinced that the desire to control others is a result of the fall and our sinful nature. And there are many people who are very good at controlling others. Often we feel the uncomfortable nature of someone's control but cannot always pinpoint the source of the control or its dysfunctional nature.
Sometimes we don't realize the controlling nature of the relationship until we are out of the relationship. An abused spouse, for instance, often does not realize what freedom is until they have been out of the abusive relationship for a period of time and it is in retrospect that they are able to pinpoint the sources of the control.
People and even groups of people control others in a variety of ways: actions; anger; flattery; attitudes; words; money; organizational structure; friendship or lack of it; intimidation; closeness or marginalization. In each case, the effort is to control the actions, thinking or behavior of others.
How does one know if there is control going on? Here are some signs:
Sometimes we don't realize the controlling nature of the relationship until we are out of the relationship. An abused spouse, for instance, often does not realize what freedom is until they have been out of the abusive relationship for a period of time and it is in retrospect that they are able to pinpoint the sources of the control.
People and even groups of people control others in a variety of ways: actions; anger; flattery; attitudes; words; money; organizational structure; friendship or lack of it; intimidation; closeness or marginalization. In each case, the effort is to control the actions, thinking or behavior of others.
How does one know if there is control going on? Here are some signs:
- I am feeling pressured to act or believe a certain way
- I feel the displeasure of another when I act independently
- My relationship with another is based on how I respond to them
- I feel intimidation
- I experience flattery when doing what the other desires and anger or distance when I don't
- I experience threats: implicit or explicit
- The other wants an exclusive relationship with me and is not comfortable with me having a variety of relationships
- There is not freedom to disagree or push back
- The other has an attitude of "you are either my friend or my enemy", "you are either for me or against me."
- The other feels free to critique me but does not give me the freedom to critique them
- I often feel an air of condescension or superiority
- I feel used in certain circumstances where I am expected to act on their behalf when they need it but there is not reciprocation
- I am often wrong but they are not - at least they make me feel that way
What these kinds of feelings are telling us is that there is dysfunction in the relationship that is violating our sense of personal freedom. If a relationship has these kinds of feelings to it we are wise to do some introspection on the relationship because it is usually going to end badly.
The reason it will end badly is that this is not a true and healthy friendship. Rather it is a relationship where one is being used - and when no longer needed will be discarded. Those who control people ultimately use people for their purposes. Otherwise they would have no need to control.
Beware of controlling relationships. Someone is ultimately going to get hurt and it will not be the controller.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Angry leaders
Consider this scenario. A ministry leader walks up to one of his staffers in a group of individuals, points his finger at his chest and says, "I am in charge here and don't ever tell (name withheld) what they can or cannot do."
What has just happened? The leader has used his anger as a means of power, control and intimidation and done so in a public manner. Whether or not he had reason to confront the other staff member is not the issue. The way he did it was wrong.
There are a segment of leaders in ministry and business who lead out of anger. Those who work for them know that if they cross them, they will face the wrath of the leader. It may be in the form of a threat (I could fire you), in the form of an angry response (Don't ever cross me again), in the form of marginalization (those who are not for me are against me), or in the form of embarrassment (like the example above where there is a public rebuke). Raised voices, high emotion, inability to dialogue, pronouncements of what you will or will not do, clear anger and implied threats are all part of leading by anger. There are many other examples but the key principle is that the leader is using anger as a means of holding power over others, controlling others or intimidating others.
Often times staff members are not immediately aware that their leader is using anger to control them. What they feel is an uneasiness with the leadership style they are experiencing. Here are some of the warning signs that their leader is leading out of anger.
Staff feel like they are walking on eggshells around their leader. Fear of a leader's response is a clear indicator of leading by fear. Staff members are careful about what they say, how they say it and often simply keep silent because they don't want to be the subject of the leader's wrath. Often in these situations staff do not know which of their leader's personalities will show up on any given day.
A leader often lets staff know who is "in charge." Those who lead from anger often use their leadership "authority" to control and manipulate their staff. Subtle or not so subtle reminders of their authority communicates to the staff that they better "toe the line" of whatever the leader desires or become the subject of their anger.
Anger surfaces when one tries to discuss with the leader behaviors that are unhealthy or issues that the leader feels strongly about. It is not uncommon for staff members to try to talk with leaders who lead out of anger about behaviors that hurt them or the team. What they typically get is a predictable angry response along with a reminder of who is in charge or, defensiveness tinged with irritation. If this becomes a pattern, you know you have a very unhealthy leader on your hands.
A leader divides people into two categories: those who are for them (friends) and those who are against them (enemies). Those who lead from anger, by nature see people as either for them or against them. By definition, those who are for them agree with them and don't cross them while those who disagree with them and cross them are moved to the "enemy" camp. Thus angry leaders build two camps: friends and enemies and you are in one or the other and there is no in between. Often, a staff member who starts out as a friend ends up as an enemy when they find their voice and start to stand up to their leader.
There is a bully factor to the leader. Angry leaders need to have their own way and will use whatever tactics they need to in order to achieve it. It can be a tactic of power (I can fire you) or a tactic of manipulation (I should just resign) or something else but it is manipulation to achieve their ends. Sometimes it is ingratiating (I am so glad I can trust you unlike the others) or the opposite (I am starting to question your effectiveness and loyalty). Whatever the tactic, staff members leave their interactions with a vague feeling that they have been used, manipulated or bullied into line.
Angry leaders are are very hard to please. Angry leaders are often driven leaders whose primary concern is how they look, how their ministry succeeds and when their expectations are not met you know it! Because life and ministry is about them, anyone who does not contribute to their success by their definition is marginalized, criticized or even discarded. Whenever there is high staff turnover one needs to turn over the rocks and look underneath to determine why. When there is a history of staff leaving or being terminated it is a clue that not all is right.
Angry leaders lack humility and often display arrogance. Angry leaders are rarely collegial but believe that they have the answers. They often make strong statements about people (often unkind) and situations. Because they are not open to feedback and dialogue when it does not agree with their conclusions it is difficult if not impossible to change their minds. Anger and arrogance are twins.
Here is what one needs to know about leaders who lead from anger. They are deeply unhealthy individuals who create a toxic environment for staff and therefore for the church or organization they lead. Their anger stems from deep and unresolved personal issues and at their core they are deeply insecure people who get their security from their ability to control others. It is a no win situation for staff because they will not change the equation by confronting the behaviors - in fact confrontation brings out the worst. And, the lack of emotional health in the leader will infect the rest of the organization.
The obvious question is what does one do? If you are a board member who sees these kinds of behaviors you have a responsibility to ensure that your leader gets help. Your responsibility is to ensure health in the organization and this is a major sign of dishealth. Even though boards like to give their senior leader the benefit of the doubt, unacceptable behaviors must be dealt with. If you are a staff member caught in this situation and see no hope of change, I would leave before the dishealth of the leader creates discouragement and cynicism in you that compromises your future ministry. If those who have the authority to act (boards) do not, take charge of your own life before you are hurt and compromised.
I am always puzzled why boards, who often know of deep issues in a senior leader do not confront them, require them to get help and if the behaviors continue fire them. We allow behaviors in the church and in Christian organizations that even the secular world would consider unacceptable and beyond the pale. There are toxic workplaces that exist right under the noses of boards who either are clueless or choose to ignore it. In the process they hurt staff, ministry effectiveness and the constituency they serve.
What has just happened? The leader has used his anger as a means of power, control and intimidation and done so in a public manner. Whether or not he had reason to confront the other staff member is not the issue. The way he did it was wrong.
There are a segment of leaders in ministry and business who lead out of anger. Those who work for them know that if they cross them, they will face the wrath of the leader. It may be in the form of a threat (I could fire you), in the form of an angry response (Don't ever cross me again), in the form of marginalization (those who are not for me are against me), or in the form of embarrassment (like the example above where there is a public rebuke). Raised voices, high emotion, inability to dialogue, pronouncements of what you will or will not do, clear anger and implied threats are all part of leading by anger. There are many other examples but the key principle is that the leader is using anger as a means of holding power over others, controlling others or intimidating others.
Often times staff members are not immediately aware that their leader is using anger to control them. What they feel is an uneasiness with the leadership style they are experiencing. Here are some of the warning signs that their leader is leading out of anger.
Staff feel like they are walking on eggshells around their leader. Fear of a leader's response is a clear indicator of leading by fear. Staff members are careful about what they say, how they say it and often simply keep silent because they don't want to be the subject of the leader's wrath. Often in these situations staff do not know which of their leader's personalities will show up on any given day.
A leader often lets staff know who is "in charge." Those who lead from anger often use their leadership "authority" to control and manipulate their staff. Subtle or not so subtle reminders of their authority communicates to the staff that they better "toe the line" of whatever the leader desires or become the subject of their anger.
Anger surfaces when one tries to discuss with the leader behaviors that are unhealthy or issues that the leader feels strongly about. It is not uncommon for staff members to try to talk with leaders who lead out of anger about behaviors that hurt them or the team. What they typically get is a predictable angry response along with a reminder of who is in charge or, defensiveness tinged with irritation. If this becomes a pattern, you know you have a very unhealthy leader on your hands.
A leader divides people into two categories: those who are for them (friends) and those who are against them (enemies). Those who lead from anger, by nature see people as either for them or against them. By definition, those who are for them agree with them and don't cross them while those who disagree with them and cross them are moved to the "enemy" camp. Thus angry leaders build two camps: friends and enemies and you are in one or the other and there is no in between. Often, a staff member who starts out as a friend ends up as an enemy when they find their voice and start to stand up to their leader.
There is a bully factor to the leader. Angry leaders need to have their own way and will use whatever tactics they need to in order to achieve it. It can be a tactic of power (I can fire you) or a tactic of manipulation (I should just resign) or something else but it is manipulation to achieve their ends. Sometimes it is ingratiating (I am so glad I can trust you unlike the others) or the opposite (I am starting to question your effectiveness and loyalty). Whatever the tactic, staff members leave their interactions with a vague feeling that they have been used, manipulated or bullied into line.
Angry leaders are are very hard to please. Angry leaders are often driven leaders whose primary concern is how they look, how their ministry succeeds and when their expectations are not met you know it! Because life and ministry is about them, anyone who does not contribute to their success by their definition is marginalized, criticized or even discarded. Whenever there is high staff turnover one needs to turn over the rocks and look underneath to determine why. When there is a history of staff leaving or being terminated it is a clue that not all is right.
Angry leaders lack humility and often display arrogance. Angry leaders are rarely collegial but believe that they have the answers. They often make strong statements about people (often unkind) and situations. Because they are not open to feedback and dialogue when it does not agree with their conclusions it is difficult if not impossible to change their minds. Anger and arrogance are twins.
Here is what one needs to know about leaders who lead from anger. They are deeply unhealthy individuals who create a toxic environment for staff and therefore for the church or organization they lead. Their anger stems from deep and unresolved personal issues and at their core they are deeply insecure people who get their security from their ability to control others. It is a no win situation for staff because they will not change the equation by confronting the behaviors - in fact confrontation brings out the worst. And, the lack of emotional health in the leader will infect the rest of the organization.
The obvious question is what does one do? If you are a board member who sees these kinds of behaviors you have a responsibility to ensure that your leader gets help. Your responsibility is to ensure health in the organization and this is a major sign of dishealth. Even though boards like to give their senior leader the benefit of the doubt, unacceptable behaviors must be dealt with. If you are a staff member caught in this situation and see no hope of change, I would leave before the dishealth of the leader creates discouragement and cynicism in you that compromises your future ministry. If those who have the authority to act (boards) do not, take charge of your own life before you are hurt and compromised.
I am always puzzled why boards, who often know of deep issues in a senior leader do not confront them, require them to get help and if the behaviors continue fire them. We allow behaviors in the church and in Christian organizations that even the secular world would consider unacceptable and beyond the pale. There are toxic workplaces that exist right under the noses of boards who either are clueless or choose to ignore it. In the process they hurt staff, ministry effectiveness and the constituency they serve.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Abuse in the church - when the bully is the pastor
As I watch the news of Penn State and Syracuse the thought that keeps running through my mind is "why did otherwise reasonable people either ignore, give a pass or not confront behaviors which it now seems were egregiousness and serious? There are probably several reasons: the perpetrators had power; people didn't want to assume that these upstanding citizens could be doing these things, and a simple failure of courage!
Let's take that same question and apply it to the church! Why do pastors get away with behaviors that would otherwise be forbidden even in the secular workplace? Here are some of the behaviors I have observed over the past 20 years of consulting with local churches and I am talking about evangelical churches here.
- Pastors whose insecurities cause them to divide people into two camps. Those who agree with them and are therefor their friends and those who disagree with them and are therefore their enemies. Enemies are ignored, shunted to the side and marginalized. How does that square with loving the flock?
- Pastors who use threats to get their way. Threats as blatant as "I could fire you if you don't do this" or "I will resign if you push me on this." "I don't care if I get zero votes on a confidence vote, I am not leaving and will take the church down with me if I have to."
- Pastors who use inappropriate sexual language or touch and even flirting with the opposite sex in both public places and private situations (counseling).
- Pastors who are intimidated by other strong leaders (who are seen as a threat to their leadership) and make it hard for them to serve in the church.
- Pastors who are unaccountable with their time. When they are away from the church, no staff members has any idea as to where they are or how to reach them.
- Pastors who will not allow their boards to speak into their lives, specific situations that have occurred, conduct executive sessions of the board or give them an annual review. This sends a loud message, "I don't have to be accountable to you."
- Pastors who hire staff without due diligence, don't mentor or coach them on a regular basis and fire them if they become a threat to them or don't perform to their standards. This is a user mentality toward people.
- Pastors who leave their church angry, deliberately dividing the congregation on their way out.
- Pastors who triangulate relationships to form alliances against others whether other staff members, board members or congregants. Not only wrong but a sign of poor emotional intelligence.
- Pastors who will take credit for any advance and find scapegoats for any failure.
- Pastors who use their "God given authority" to lead as they see fit. After all they are "God's anointed." Again, this ignores accountability and shared leadership.
- Pastors who speak ill of board members or congregants even as they become angry if they hear of either group criticizing them.
Fortunately, the vast majority of pastors I work with are wonderful individuals who are deeply committed Christ followers and models of Christian leadership. But when I see behaviors that are out of the pale and ignored, as they were with Penn State and Syracuse, I have to ask myself why? I understand the unregenerate behavior but I don't understand those surrounding the situation who allow it to continue. Where is the board? Where are members of the congregation who see and are grieved?
Often pastors who exhibit these characteristics are simply bullies. They get in the face of anyone who tries to speak to their behaviors which is why boards often back off. But why should a board back off and since when do bullies qualify to be pastors of a local church? I think of the qualifications for elders and deacons in the New Testament and the further comments of Peter on the matter and wonder why we allow behaviors that are so contrary to both New Testament teaching and the model of Jesus.
TJ Addington of Addington Consulting has a passion to help individuals and organizations maximize their impact and go to the next level of effectiveness. He can be reached at tjaddington@gmail.com
Creating cultures of excellence
Reality Distortion Fields
The phrase was coined by members of Steve Jobs teams when he wanted to convince them that something they all knew to be false was indeed true. They would quietly whisper, "beware of the reality distortion field, don't get caught in it." Steve, with his powerful, over the top persuasive abilities was able to convince a lot of people a lot of things a lot of the time and it all fit his version of reality, his reality distortion field.
The truth is that we all have reality distortion fields which allow us to see reality on our terms. Healthy individuals keep those distortion fields to a minimum while unhealthy individuals allow them to grow and expand until they are literally living in an alternative reality - often quiet separated from reality.
Some years ago, I was asked by a pastor and board to determine why he and the board were experiencing so much conflict. I interviewed board members, staff members and finally the pastor himself. He was amazed that people felt the way they did about him as he had been living with a picture of himself that was quite different than the picture others had. His distortion field (the level of distortion between his view and reality) would have caused him to likely lose his job if he had not rectified the problem quickly because it was at the root of the conflict between he and the board and staff.
I have seen reality distortion fields become pathological when an individual becomes so disconnected from reality (yes in ministry) that they actually believe their unhealthy treatment of others is OK and that those they mistreat are actually OK with it as well. Of course, when you do your own inquiry one finds out that this is not the case at all but the defensive mechanisms of the one with a significant reality distortion field protects him or her from the guilt they ought to have for their behavior. Reality distortion fields always provide the perpetrator of poor behavior an alternative explanation which absolves them and places the blame on others.
Usually, reality distortion fields are allowed to grow (often in leaders) because those around them do not have the courage to confront and tell the individual the truth. There is a reason for the lack of courage. These individuals are very hard to get through to. Their defensiveness is massive and they don't want to hear a version of truth that messes with their reality distortion field. However, the logical outcome of their progression into non reality is narcissism where they can justify anything and eventually implode but only after hurting a great many people.
I asked one board whose pastor exhibited these tendencies why they had not done a job review in decades. The answer was that the senior pastor was too defensive and threatened by it so they held off, allowing the senior pastor's behavior to escalate and continue to hurt others. This particular pastor would use threats against those who tried to penetrate his defenses. The board actually thought that if they pushed their pastor he would quit since he had threatened on a number of occasions to do so. Ironically it would have been the best thing that could have happened to the church.
Those who live with reality distortion fields are crazy makers to those around them. They so distort reality that those who live in reality start to wonder if they are somehow going nuts and may even be to blame for the chaos that they see around them! It is like the inmates of an insane asylum convincing the staff that they ought to trade places because it is really the staff who are living with reality distortion fields and not the inmates. If you have ever lived or worked close to one with a reality distortion field you know exactly what I am talking about!
If you have a situation like this in your ministry please deal with it. The longer you wait the more distortion takes place and the more distortion takes place the more people get hurt.
The truth is that we all have reality distortion fields which allow us to see reality on our terms. Healthy individuals keep those distortion fields to a minimum while unhealthy individuals allow them to grow and expand until they are literally living in an alternative reality - often quiet separated from reality.
Some years ago, I was asked by a pastor and board to determine why he and the board were experiencing so much conflict. I interviewed board members, staff members and finally the pastor himself. He was amazed that people felt the way they did about him as he had been living with a picture of himself that was quite different than the picture others had. His distortion field (the level of distortion between his view and reality) would have caused him to likely lose his job if he had not rectified the problem quickly because it was at the root of the conflict between he and the board and staff.
I have seen reality distortion fields become pathological when an individual becomes so disconnected from reality (yes in ministry) that they actually believe their unhealthy treatment of others is OK and that those they mistreat are actually OK with it as well. Of course, when you do your own inquiry one finds out that this is not the case at all but the defensive mechanisms of the one with a significant reality distortion field protects him or her from the guilt they ought to have for their behavior. Reality distortion fields always provide the perpetrator of poor behavior an alternative explanation which absolves them and places the blame on others.
Usually, reality distortion fields are allowed to grow (often in leaders) because those around them do not have the courage to confront and tell the individual the truth. There is a reason for the lack of courage. These individuals are very hard to get through to. Their defensiveness is massive and they don't want to hear a version of truth that messes with their reality distortion field. However, the logical outcome of their progression into non reality is narcissism where they can justify anything and eventually implode but only after hurting a great many people.
I asked one board whose pastor exhibited these tendencies why they had not done a job review in decades. The answer was that the senior pastor was too defensive and threatened by it so they held off, allowing the senior pastor's behavior to escalate and continue to hurt others. This particular pastor would use threats against those who tried to penetrate his defenses. The board actually thought that if they pushed their pastor he would quit since he had threatened on a number of occasions to do so. Ironically it would have been the best thing that could have happened to the church.
Those who live with reality distortion fields are crazy makers to those around them. They so distort reality that those who live in reality start to wonder if they are somehow going nuts and may even be to blame for the chaos that they see around them! It is like the inmates of an insane asylum convincing the staff that they ought to trade places because it is really the staff who are living with reality distortion fields and not the inmates. If you have ever lived or worked close to one with a reality distortion field you know exactly what I am talking about!
If you have a situation like this in your ministry please deal with it. The longer you wait the more distortion takes place and the more distortion takes place the more people get hurt.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Missions and child protection
The Pen State scandal and the recent issues faced by New Tribes Mission remind us of the critical importance of ensuring that ministries do everything they can to protect the minor children under their care. Many churches in the United States have a way of vetting those who work with children but mission organizations may not always be aware of their liability with short term teams coming out, or with their own staff.
For example, orphanages or kids ministries in the majority world can be targets of opportunity for pedophiles as they know that there may be less scrutiny than in the west. In addition, in any given year, tens of thousands of kids and adults from churches in the US go abroad to work with children internationally. The question is whether mission agencies take appropriate measures with those who will have contact with children on those trips.
Suggestions:
One, require a background check such as a local church would do for those who will be working overseas with minors - either missionary kids or local children.
Two, before the event, train the adults and children involved in the procedures you have in place to prevent any abuse or opportunities for abuse. Most local churches have such procedures in place that you can borrow from. A best practice would be a mission wide procedure for training those working with minors.
Three, have a zero tolerance policy for mission staff or those working as volunteers. If an incident occurs, report it immediately to both the immediate supervisor and a senior leader. The reason you report it to both a senior leader and the immediate supervisor is to ensure that it is not covered up. If it involves a short term team member, that member should immediately be flown home. If an allegation is made against someone on staff, they must immediately be removed from all contact with minors and if proven they should be removed from the mission. Pedophiles are highly likely to re-offend and no ministry can take that chance. In addition, ensure that the intake process for full time missionaries includes testing for personality disorders and pathology. Tests like the MMPI can save you a lot of pain by keeping the wrong people from going to the field in the first place.
Four, never cover up an offence of pedophilia. The greatest tragedy of the New Tribes episode is that they chose to protect offenders, even leaving them in place or transferring them to other schools. Even those they called home were not held accountable. This allowed, like it appears at Penn State, for the abuse to continue. Protecting the abuser virtually guarantees further victims.
Five, take responsibility for helping a victim get help. The victim is not the individual who offended but the individual they violated. It is amazing to me that in both ministry and places like Penn State there was a greater protection of the violator than the victim. This is a huge violation of trust - as New Tribes discovered and Penn State will discover. Hold the accuser responsible, don't cover up and do all you can to get the victim help.
Minor children must be protected in every way we can from those who would abuse them and cause them a lifetime of emotional trauma. Does your mission have safeguards in place?
For example, orphanages or kids ministries in the majority world can be targets of opportunity for pedophiles as they know that there may be less scrutiny than in the west. In addition, in any given year, tens of thousands of kids and adults from churches in the US go abroad to work with children internationally. The question is whether mission agencies take appropriate measures with those who will have contact with children on those trips.
Suggestions:
One, require a background check such as a local church would do for those who will be working overseas with minors - either missionary kids or local children.
Two, before the event, train the adults and children involved in the procedures you have in place to prevent any abuse or opportunities for abuse. Most local churches have such procedures in place that you can borrow from. A best practice would be a mission wide procedure for training those working with minors.
Three, have a zero tolerance policy for mission staff or those working as volunteers. If an incident occurs, report it immediately to both the immediate supervisor and a senior leader. The reason you report it to both a senior leader and the immediate supervisor is to ensure that it is not covered up. If it involves a short term team member, that member should immediately be flown home. If an allegation is made against someone on staff, they must immediately be removed from all contact with minors and if proven they should be removed from the mission. Pedophiles are highly likely to re-offend and no ministry can take that chance. In addition, ensure that the intake process for full time missionaries includes testing for personality disorders and pathology. Tests like the MMPI can save you a lot of pain by keeping the wrong people from going to the field in the first place.
Four, never cover up an offence of pedophilia. The greatest tragedy of the New Tribes episode is that they chose to protect offenders, even leaving them in place or transferring them to other schools. Even those they called home were not held accountable. This allowed, like it appears at Penn State, for the abuse to continue. Protecting the abuser virtually guarantees further victims.
Five, take responsibility for helping a victim get help. The victim is not the individual who offended but the individual they violated. It is amazing to me that in both ministry and places like Penn State there was a greater protection of the violator than the victim. This is a huge violation of trust - as New Tribes discovered and Penn State will discover. Hold the accuser responsible, don't cover up and do all you can to get the victim help.
Minor children must be protected in every way we can from those who would abuse them and cause them a lifetime of emotional trauma. Does your mission have safeguards in place?
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Signs you work in a toxic workplace
Lack of respect from your supervisor or leadership. Respect means that you are valued, that your opinions are taken seriously, that you are not taken for granted and that you are acknowledged for your contribution. Lack of respect eats away at our sense of self-worth and that you are not valued for your work. Lack of respect is often a sign of arrogance or even narcissism in a leader who needs to devalue others in order to add value to themselves.
Abusive behavior. I just spoke to an individual who has been the target of profane laced diatribes by a well known Christian leader whose conversations to those outside his organization are spiritual and uplifting! His words to his own employees are often demeaning, caustic, often angry and certainly don’t fit the definition of uplifting and encouraging. Abusive behavior whether with words or actions create uncertainty, anxiety and loss of respect.
Unpredictability. A hallmark of stable work environments is an element of predictability in leaders. You understand what their values are, what you can expect from them, where the organization is going and what is expected of you. Leaders who are unpredictable and whose behaviors or values or direction is subject to regular change create anxiety in their staff. That unpredictability is not just a “behavior quirk,” but often a symptom of an unhealthy leader. His or her unpredictability creates instability among staff and that instability is destructive to a healthy workplace.
Leading by fiat. This is the leader who rather than building a shared leadership culture and team simply tells people what to do, how to do it and expect others to jump at their command. They don’t respect boundaries, time, and opinions of others and treat employees as their servants. One thing they rarely keep are the best employees who refuse to be treated like chattel and who want a voice in the work they are doing. This environment leads to high turnover as the best choose to leave if indeed they come in the first place.
Cultures of fear. Unhealthy leaders often create a culture of fear where staff feel that they need to walk on eggshells, cannot be honest with their views and live with constant anxiety that they will not live up to their leader’s expectations. Ongoing or regular fear on the part of staff is a sign of a toxic environment which usually goes back to the leader. Another way of saying this is that where there is constant “drama” there is something toxic taking place.
Narcissistic leaders. The theme here is that it is all about the leader. They take the credit when things go well and blame others when things go south. They are always right and as long as you agree with them you are on the inside. Once you choose to disagree you are marginalized, demonized and placed on the outside. With a narcissistic leader you are either good or bad and that is determined by whether you agree with or challenge them. Narcissistic leaders create paranoid workplaces.
Lack of trust. Where there are significant trust issues in an organization, it is usually a symptom of deep leadership issues. Mistrust indicates that there is not a true team, that collaborative leadership is not possible and is usually a symptom of leaders who are unhealthy. Healthy leaders create trusting cultures and model what trust looks like in their relationships, behaviors and conversation. Lack of trust is deeply toxic and has the affect of creating deeper mistrust.
Lack of trust. Where there are significant trust issues in an organization, it is usually a symptom of deep leadership issues. Mistrust indicates that there is not a true team, that collaborative leadership is not possible and is usually a symptom of leaders who are unhealthy. Healthy leaders create trusting cultures and model what trust looks like in their relationships, behaviors and conversation. Lack of trust is deeply toxic and has the affect of creating deeper mistrust.
Bottom line? If you work in a toxic workplace you often don’t even realize how much anxiety you live with or how unhealthy your environment is until you choose to leave and all of a sudden realize that you feel free and are no longer carrying the heavy burdens you have been living with. If your workplace is characterized by any of the seven descriptors listed above, you ought to seriously consider leaving. Life is short and God wants us to use our gifting in positive, meaningful ways that bring joy and satisfaction rather than fear and anxiety. Choose to be courageous and find a healthy workplace.
TJ Addington (Addington Consulting) has a passion to help individuals and organizations maximize their impact and go to the next level of effectiveness. He can be reached at tjaddington@gmail.com.
"Creating cultures of organizational excellence."
Friday, February 11, 2011
Cultures of Life and Death
The culture of Christ is a culture of life in all of its dimensions. It sees people as made in the image of God with eternal souls. As men and women and children in His image it sees them as infinitely precious and rejects all actions, attitudes or institutions that demean or diminish that image.
As image bearers - no matter how flawed the image by the fall, every individual on this planet has infinite value to the Creator, and therefore to us as His family members.
But just as the culture of Christ is a culture of life in all of its dimensions, the culture of the evil one is that of death and destruction in all of its dimensions. Jesus put it this way in John 10:10, "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full." Christ brings life. Satan brings death.
It should not surprise us, therefore, that the predominate culture of our world is one of the devaluing of human life. Think of all the things that devalue life: pornography, sexual promiscuity, lack of justice, corruption, the sex trade, abortion, the indiscriminate killing of civilians in warfare, spousal and child abuse, slavery, discrimination, and all behaviors that devalue people. Wherever people are marginalized, mistreated, denied basic rights, oppressed, used and denied justice, the culture of the evil one prevails - and that is most of our world.
The Gospel is good news for the soul - and the only route to eternal life - but its implications are far broader than that. Jesus invaded our world to right what had gone wrong in the fall and which will be completed in his return. We are told to pray (and therefore act) that "His will would be done on earth as it is in heaven." The gospel brings eternal life but it also must bring a culture of life to a world that has a culture of death and devaluation of people made in His image.
As Christ followers we are called to live and to promote a culture of life where the dignity of individuals is lifted high, where those things that devalue life are seen for what they are and to the extent that we can have an influence, eradicated.
Think about this: Prison ministry brings a culture of life to a dark place; abstinence education globally brings a culture of life rather than a culture of using people for our own gratification; those who stand up for justice bring a culture of life; those who help women with unwanted pregnancy stand up for a culture of life; those who minister to orphans and widows the same. Every time we act to help those who are marginalized, mistreated, oppressed or uphold the dignity of people made in God's image we support a culture of life.
The thief comes to steal and destroy in every way He can. Jesus comes to heal, save and restore in all dimensions of life. When we join Him in that work we support Him and push back the culture of death with His culture of life.
As image bearers - no matter how flawed the image by the fall, every individual on this planet has infinite value to the Creator, and therefore to us as His family members.
But just as the culture of Christ is a culture of life in all of its dimensions, the culture of the evil one is that of death and destruction in all of its dimensions. Jesus put it this way in John 10:10, "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full." Christ brings life. Satan brings death.
It should not surprise us, therefore, that the predominate culture of our world is one of the devaluing of human life. Think of all the things that devalue life: pornography, sexual promiscuity, lack of justice, corruption, the sex trade, abortion, the indiscriminate killing of civilians in warfare, spousal and child abuse, slavery, discrimination, and all behaviors that devalue people. Wherever people are marginalized, mistreated, denied basic rights, oppressed, used and denied justice, the culture of the evil one prevails - and that is most of our world.
The Gospel is good news for the soul - and the only route to eternal life - but its implications are far broader than that. Jesus invaded our world to right what had gone wrong in the fall and which will be completed in his return. We are told to pray (and therefore act) that "His will would be done on earth as it is in heaven." The gospel brings eternal life but it also must bring a culture of life to a world that has a culture of death and devaluation of people made in His image.
As Christ followers we are called to live and to promote a culture of life where the dignity of individuals is lifted high, where those things that devalue life are seen for what they are and to the extent that we can have an influence, eradicated.
Think about this: Prison ministry brings a culture of life to a dark place; abstinence education globally brings a culture of life rather than a culture of using people for our own gratification; those who stand up for justice bring a culture of life; those who help women with unwanted pregnancy stand up for a culture of life; those who minister to orphans and widows the same. Every time we act to help those who are marginalized, mistreated, oppressed or uphold the dignity of people made in God's image we support a culture of life.
The thief comes to steal and destroy in every way He can. Jesus comes to heal, save and restore in all dimensions of life. When we join Him in that work we support Him and push back the culture of death with His culture of life.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
The Questions Raised by the New Tribes Mission Scandal
The terrible scandal that has erupted around New Tribes Mission (NTM) over systematic abuse in at least one of their mission schools in the seventies and eighties, along with a failed attempt to minimize what happened, protect the guilty and ignore the victims raises an important question for those of us who lead ministries. When things go wrong – and they will – how do we respond? Equally, how do we minimize the chances that something like this could happen in our own organizations?
Minimizing our risk starts with the ethos we develop in our organization. Many organizations have “elephants” that are off limits for discussion – and everyone knows it. We have intentionally sought to develop an open ethos and environment in ReachGlobal where any issue can be put on the table and where there are no lingering elephants in the room. An open ethos that invites dialogue rather than discourages it gives everyone permission to talk about issues that are of concern to them. NTM had a history of the opposite: One could not challenge leaders without it being framed as a spiritual issue of rebellion. There was not an open ethos and the result was that it took decades for a known problem to be brought into the light. One of the questions every leader ought to be asking right now is whether there is an open ethos in their ministry where known problems can be brought into the light easily and without incrimination!
Leaders who seek to cover up sin in order to preserve the reputation of their organization end up doing just the opposite. One of the first jobs of a leader is to provide a safe environment for those who work for them. This includes physical safety where possible – missions is inherently dangerous in many places – but it also implies a promise to staff that if something occurs that should not have that they will always respond in the best interests of those affected and in the best interests of all of their staff.
NTM failed this test miserably. In the attempt to minimize damage to their reputation they responded in ways that put children more at risk and by not acting vigorously and quickly to address the problem caused huge pain to many families and former MKs as evidenced by the stories that are being told. Even now, many former NTM MK’s and personnel are wondering aloud on blogs if there were not other schools where the same abuse took place and whether NTM will address those schools as well. Had NTM addressed the systemic issues quickly, forcefully and thoroughly in the beginning, they would have protected their future staff and spared the organization the agony they are currently experiencing. What they did instead is to put their own people at risk for the sake of their mission and reputation – a moral “exchange” that was unconscionable.
Protecting your staff and acting with integrity requires that leaders confront serious problems directly, with no attempt to hide or cover up the facts, because they know that in doing the right thing they serve their people best and protect the reputation of God. The question is not whether bad things will happen in Christian organizations – we live in a fallen world. The question is whether leaders will act with moral integrity and courage when it does for the sake of their people and God’s reputation regardless of the fallout in the short term. Ironically, short term losses in reputation actually make for long term gains in reputation as staff and others see that leaders can be trusted to do the right thing even when it is hard. Regardless, real leaders confront known issues quickly and vigorously knowing that doing the right thing is always the right thing, no matter what the fallout.
Those who serve on ministry boards have huge responsibility to ensure that they are alerted to potential issues – it should be one of their policies and that such issues are thoroughly explored and responded to quickly. The NTM situation would be a great discussion for many ministry boards. Are they prepared to respond to bad news with wise and decisive action? They need to ask the question, if this happened to us, how would we respond? Don’t pretend that it will never happen to you. It might. The question is whether you are ready to respond in ways different than NTM did?
There is a final question to be raised. The world believes that the end justifies the means. Christians believe that the means must be as righteous as the ends. NTM by its actions and words sent a strong message that they were willing to compromise the safety of their MK’s for the cause of the Gospel. That was an immoral exchange which permanently scarred many MK’s and their families for life. In some cases it also inoculated them against the Gospel itself. The ends never justify the means no matter how noble the cause of our ministry.
It is easy to throw stones and that is not my intention although I am sad, angry and believe that NTM utterly failed in its care for its staff, the ethos they developed and the response they exhibited. But my real question is whether we as ministry leaders and organizations can learn something from their leadership failure and ensure that we have done all that we can to develop healthy ministry environments where serious issues cannot be swept under the rug, where the care and safety of our staff is a high priority and where our ends never justify our means. That to me is the relevant response to this sordid affair.
Minimizing our risk starts with the ethos we develop in our organization. Many organizations have “elephants” that are off limits for discussion – and everyone knows it. We have intentionally sought to develop an open ethos and environment in ReachGlobal where any issue can be put on the table and where there are no lingering elephants in the room. An open ethos that invites dialogue rather than discourages it gives everyone permission to talk about issues that are of concern to them. NTM had a history of the opposite: One could not challenge leaders without it being framed as a spiritual issue of rebellion. There was not an open ethos and the result was that it took decades for a known problem to be brought into the light. One of the questions every leader ought to be asking right now is whether there is an open ethos in their ministry where known problems can be brought into the light easily and without incrimination!
Leaders who seek to cover up sin in order to preserve the reputation of their organization end up doing just the opposite. One of the first jobs of a leader is to provide a safe environment for those who work for them. This includes physical safety where possible – missions is inherently dangerous in many places – but it also implies a promise to staff that if something occurs that should not have that they will always respond in the best interests of those affected and in the best interests of all of their staff.
NTM failed this test miserably. In the attempt to minimize damage to their reputation they responded in ways that put children more at risk and by not acting vigorously and quickly to address the problem caused huge pain to many families and former MKs as evidenced by the stories that are being told. Even now, many former NTM MK’s and personnel are wondering aloud on blogs if there were not other schools where the same abuse took place and whether NTM will address those schools as well. Had NTM addressed the systemic issues quickly, forcefully and thoroughly in the beginning, they would have protected their future staff and spared the organization the agony they are currently experiencing. What they did instead is to put their own people at risk for the sake of their mission and reputation – a moral “exchange” that was unconscionable.
Protecting your staff and acting with integrity requires that leaders confront serious problems directly, with no attempt to hide or cover up the facts, because they know that in doing the right thing they serve their people best and protect the reputation of God. The question is not whether bad things will happen in Christian organizations – we live in a fallen world. The question is whether leaders will act with moral integrity and courage when it does for the sake of their people and God’s reputation regardless of the fallout in the short term. Ironically, short term losses in reputation actually make for long term gains in reputation as staff and others see that leaders can be trusted to do the right thing even when it is hard. Regardless, real leaders confront known issues quickly and vigorously knowing that doing the right thing is always the right thing, no matter what the fallout.
Those who serve on ministry boards have huge responsibility to ensure that they are alerted to potential issues – it should be one of their policies and that such issues are thoroughly explored and responded to quickly. The NTM situation would be a great discussion for many ministry boards. Are they prepared to respond to bad news with wise and decisive action? They need to ask the question, if this happened to us, how would we respond? Don’t pretend that it will never happen to you. It might. The question is whether you are ready to respond in ways different than NTM did?
There is a final question to be raised. The world believes that the end justifies the means. Christians believe that the means must be as righteous as the ends. NTM by its actions and words sent a strong message that they were willing to compromise the safety of their MK’s for the cause of the Gospel. That was an immoral exchange which permanently scarred many MK’s and their families for life. In some cases it also inoculated them against the Gospel itself. The ends never justify the means no matter how noble the cause of our ministry.
It is easy to throw stones and that is not my intention although I am sad, angry and believe that NTM utterly failed in its care for its staff, the ethos they developed and the response they exhibited. But my real question is whether we as ministry leaders and organizations can learn something from their leadership failure and ensure that we have done all that we can to develop healthy ministry environments where serious issues cannot be swept under the rug, where the care and safety of our staff is a high priority and where our ends never justify our means. That to me is the relevant response to this sordid affair.
Monday, September 6, 2010
New Tribes Mission faces the consequences of its past
I have just completed the reading of one of the most shameful, shocking and disturbing reports for a Christian organization. It is the GRACE report (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment) to New Tribes Mission “for the investigatory review of child abuse at New Tribes Fanda missionary school” in Senegal. The systematic abuse took place in the 80’s and 90’s against Missionary Kids (MK’s) while at this school.”
The introduction to the report states that “In the 1980’s and the 1990’s, New Tribes Mission (NTM) operated a boarding school in the village of Fanda, in the country of Senegal. The children of missionaries were housed at this school, sometimes over the strong objections of their parents. The workers NTM placed in charge of these children were often cruel and many of the boys and girls placed there endured sexual, physical, emotional, and spiritual abuse. Much of this behavior was criminal.”
As if this abuse were not enough, NTM systematically ignored the issue even when they were alerted to the abuse taking place. The field council in Senegal kept abusive personnel in the school even after complaints from children and parents. They downplayed allegations and did not alert the executive leadership in the United States. When the executive leadership in the US was made aware they did not alert authorities, allowed abusers to remain in NTM and hushed up serious (criminal) behavior they were made aware of. The GRACE report suggests that NTM placed the evangelization of the unsaved above the safety, protection and best interests of MKs. In some cases years went by before NTM was willing to even address the concerns of parents to say nothing of the abused children.
The cost to these MK’s of NTM in Senegal has been immense. While some have continued in their faith, others will have nothing to do with Christianity as much of the abuse was perpetuated in the name of Christ like the abuse by priests in the Catholic Church. Many are deeply bitter at NTM for the hypocrisy of ignoring the sin in their own organization. Like all those who have been victims of sexual, emotional or physical abuse, all of these kids (now adults) live with scars that will never be completely healed. As the report says, three generations have been deeply wounded and scarred by this abuse.
What contributed to a culture where such abuse could continue unfettered and for such a long period of time? The report suggests that NTM has had a culture of authority among its leaders that does not allow for disagreement. Disagreement was seen as rebellion and sinful and leaders led by authoritarian and coercive means. Field council leaders in Senegal had nearly complete authority over all aspects of their missionaries lives – with little recourse unless one simply resigned and even then, this was seen as a rebellious spirit against leaders. Even now, NTM leadership seems to believe this is a problem and is seeking to change their often legalistic, non-grace filled culture according to the report. They are also seeking to determine whether there were other places where such abuse took place.
It is also clear that NTM did not screen applicants for their mission with any degree of care. In addition, even knowing that they had pedophiles amongst them they did not discipline them, expose them or remove them. In one case a female missionary wife had an affair with a student at the school. The situation was hushed up, she was transferred to another assignment and the victim’s family was let go from the mission. Such a gross violation of trust can hardly be imagined! Only now – years later with the publishing of this report is it recommended that she be fired. Missions who do not properly and carefully screen applicants are on a course for trouble!
Too many missions in their drive to evangelize the world take almost all who come their way without regard to their spiritual, emotional, relational and skill health. This was certainly true of NTM as evidenced by those who perpetuated these egregious acts as well as the leaders who chose to minimize, ignore or even protect the abusers. Even at the highest levels of the organization there was not the health among leaders to choose the right course of action. The evangelization of the world took precedence over the care and health (spiritual, emotional and relational) of their own personnel.
What forced the issue for NTM? Why did they come forward now? Not, it seems, only their desire to bring sin to light within their organization (I hope their desire is authentic). There was the pressure put on them by their own abused MKs through their blog ( New Tribes Mission Abuse ), along with public pressure as the story has emerged over the last years. Even then, NTM’s response was too little, poorly managed, and fell far short of the independent investigation that finally took place by GRACE with its strong recommendations. This has left the affected victims and their families with serious questions as to whether the response today is genuine or is simply a reflection of self – interest. In the short run it is indeed hard to tell. The long run repentance, treatment of victims and changes in its ethos and culture will tell the real story.
Choosing to confront sin is a tough thing. But choosing to ignore it says everything about the character of an organization and its leaders.
This situation bothers me deeply on many counts. I am an MK and am aware of other situations like this that have destroyed the lives of MKs. I am a leader of a mission organization and know the trust that is placed in our leadership by supporters, staff and churches. I am a father and soon to be grandfather who cannot imagine a pain greater than the violation of my children or grandchildren and its devastating long term consequences. And, as a Christian leader I am convinced that we are and ought to be held to a much higher standard than others. No ends (evangelization of the lost) justifies the means (substandard treatment of kids so that the gospel gets out).
I hope and pray that something redemptive will come from this tragic chapter. Humility, repentance and a massive ethos change for NMT and healing for victims and their families. May such a chapter never be repeated in modern day missions.
The full GRACE report is a difficult and sad read. May it also be a cautionary tale for mission organizations. I understand my comments here are unusually to the point. Not more so, however, than the report that NTM solicited from GRACE.
The introduction to the report states that “In the 1980’s and the 1990’s, New Tribes Mission (NTM) operated a boarding school in the village of Fanda, in the country of Senegal. The children of missionaries were housed at this school, sometimes over the strong objections of their parents. The workers NTM placed in charge of these children were often cruel and many of the boys and girls placed there endured sexual, physical, emotional, and spiritual abuse. Much of this behavior was criminal.”
As if this abuse were not enough, NTM systematically ignored the issue even when they were alerted to the abuse taking place. The field council in Senegal kept abusive personnel in the school even after complaints from children and parents. They downplayed allegations and did not alert the executive leadership in the United States. When the executive leadership in the US was made aware they did not alert authorities, allowed abusers to remain in NTM and hushed up serious (criminal) behavior they were made aware of. The GRACE report suggests that NTM placed the evangelization of the unsaved above the safety, protection and best interests of MKs. In some cases years went by before NTM was willing to even address the concerns of parents to say nothing of the abused children.
The cost to these MK’s of NTM in Senegal has been immense. While some have continued in their faith, others will have nothing to do with Christianity as much of the abuse was perpetuated in the name of Christ like the abuse by priests in the Catholic Church. Many are deeply bitter at NTM for the hypocrisy of ignoring the sin in their own organization. Like all those who have been victims of sexual, emotional or physical abuse, all of these kids (now adults) live with scars that will never be completely healed. As the report says, three generations have been deeply wounded and scarred by this abuse.
What contributed to a culture where such abuse could continue unfettered and for such a long period of time? The report suggests that NTM has had a culture of authority among its leaders that does not allow for disagreement. Disagreement was seen as rebellion and sinful and leaders led by authoritarian and coercive means. Field council leaders in Senegal had nearly complete authority over all aspects of their missionaries lives – with little recourse unless one simply resigned and even then, this was seen as a rebellious spirit against leaders. Even now, NTM leadership seems to believe this is a problem and is seeking to change their often legalistic, non-grace filled culture according to the report. They are also seeking to determine whether there were other places where such abuse took place.
It is also clear that NTM did not screen applicants for their mission with any degree of care. In addition, even knowing that they had pedophiles amongst them they did not discipline them, expose them or remove them. In one case a female missionary wife had an affair with a student at the school. The situation was hushed up, she was transferred to another assignment and the victim’s family was let go from the mission. Such a gross violation of trust can hardly be imagined! Only now – years later with the publishing of this report is it recommended that she be fired. Missions who do not properly and carefully screen applicants are on a course for trouble!
Too many missions in their drive to evangelize the world take almost all who come their way without regard to their spiritual, emotional, relational and skill health. This was certainly true of NTM as evidenced by those who perpetuated these egregious acts as well as the leaders who chose to minimize, ignore or even protect the abusers. Even at the highest levels of the organization there was not the health among leaders to choose the right course of action. The evangelization of the world took precedence over the care and health (spiritual, emotional and relational) of their own personnel.
What forced the issue for NTM? Why did they come forward now? Not, it seems, only their desire to bring sin to light within their organization (I hope their desire is authentic). There was the pressure put on them by their own abused MKs through their blog ( New Tribes Mission Abuse ), along with public pressure as the story has emerged over the last years. Even then, NTM’s response was too little, poorly managed, and fell far short of the independent investigation that finally took place by GRACE with its strong recommendations. This has left the affected victims and their families with serious questions as to whether the response today is genuine or is simply a reflection of self – interest. In the short run it is indeed hard to tell. The long run repentance, treatment of victims and changes in its ethos and culture will tell the real story.
Choosing to confront sin is a tough thing. But choosing to ignore it says everything about the character of an organization and its leaders.
This situation bothers me deeply on many counts. I am an MK and am aware of other situations like this that have destroyed the lives of MKs. I am a leader of a mission organization and know the trust that is placed in our leadership by supporters, staff and churches. I am a father and soon to be grandfather who cannot imagine a pain greater than the violation of my children or grandchildren and its devastating long term consequences. And, as a Christian leader I am convinced that we are and ought to be held to a much higher standard than others. No ends (evangelization of the lost) justifies the means (substandard treatment of kids so that the gospel gets out).
I hope and pray that something redemptive will come from this tragic chapter. Humility, repentance and a massive ethos change for NMT and healing for victims and their families. May such a chapter never be repeated in modern day missions.
The full GRACE report is a difficult and sad read. May it also be a cautionary tale for mission organizations. I understand my comments here are unusually to the point. Not more so, however, than the report that NTM solicited from GRACE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)