I preached on the moral failure of Christian leaders. In that sermon, I put forward 5 templates of moral failure that appear in the Bible. These templates are still relevant in the life of churches. Below is my offer. This isn't perfect or a complete idea.
5 Templates of moral
failure for Christian leaders
-
Pharisee Template
-
Sadducee Template
-
False Teacher Template
-
Ezekiel Shepherd Template
-
Aaron Template
Pharisee
Template
Moral failure: Using
tradition and rules to manipulate people
Modern example:
Legalism without compassion
Biblical examples:
Matthew 23:4,13,16,18; 12:1-13; 15:3,14; Mark 7:1-13; Luke 17:1;
14:1-6
In this template, a
leader uses traditional boundaries or legalistic boundaries to
dictate how a group of followers should exhibit their faith life. It
could apply to pastors or lay leaders within a local congregation.
The problem is that
tradition serves to flavor the way a people live out a faith life.
Rules define the boundaries of a community. Neither of these are
static, rigid, or permanent. As time and culture shape the people, so
the community is also transformed over time.
The pharisees in the
New Testament used both tradition and rules to control the daily life
of the people. Jesus accuses them of missing the point of the law. In
contemporary settings, legalism is used to keep people within a
certain set of lifestyle choices. The is little grace or forgiveness
shown.
In worst case
scenarios, this is how cults are formed. They have a rigid set of
rules that are established around a central authority. Breaking the
rules is usually accompanied by increasing levels of “discipline”.
In simple cases, it
may be nothing more than applying guilt or shame to an individual for
behaviors. This should not be confused with accountability,
reprove/rebuke, or the true spirit of discipline. Someone who falls
into the pharisee template would use guilt and shame to bring another
person into line with their opinion of how people should live. If
allowed to get out of control, this could shape the entire
congregation.
Sadducee
Template
Moral failure: Manipulating the standards to fit in with cultural,
political, or outside forces
Modern example: Compromising values or principles to remain relevant
Biblical examples: James 5:1-5; Philippians 1:15-17; Revelation
3:15-17
In this template, a leader would allow values or principles to be
compromised. Values and principles refer to moral and ethical
foundations that are defined within the community as necessary. This
could apply to pastors or lay leaders.
There is nothing wrong with adapting to the environment in order to
remain relevant within a cultural setting. The problem arises with
central moral or ethical values are allowed to be compromised. The
church has to remain true to the message while being able to
communicate it through various methods.
The Sadducees were a branch of the religious leadership within the
New Testament era. They were also responsible for being the bridge
with political groups and bridging the Jewish and Roman cultural
settings. They were the economic upper caste within the Jewish
society. They also were the liaison with the Roman empirical
government. They did not agree with the Pharisees on numerous
theological issues. It would appear that Jesus was pointing in part
to the Sadducees when condemning the rich and the powerful. They also
did not hold to observance of purity (and possibly dietary) laws as
the Pharisees.
In congregations, this could be witnessed as pastors not meeting the
ethical standards of their ordination in order to “fit in” with a
community or group of people. It could apply to lay leaders who
violate the ethical standards of the church in order to maintain
business connections or cultural influence.
False Teacher
Template
Moral failure: Refusing to study and learn beyond their opinions and
influencing others against accepted authority
Modern examples: Misunderstanding or misapplying a
biblical/theological precept and out of that error leading people to
reject accepted authority regarding that issue
Biblical examples: 2 Peter 2:1; Galatians 1:6; 3:1; 4:9; 5🕛:12;6:12;
1 Timothy 6:3; 2 Timothy 2:14-18; Titus 1:10-11
The problem develops when a teacher draws people away from
fundamentals. They assume a position based on an error of
understanding or a lack of study. Any effort to correct them or get
them to learn beyond their opinion is met with hostility. They also
attempt to influence others to join in their position.
In many cases, false teaching centers on taking a particular subject
out of context of the entirety of scriptural witness regarding that
issue. The teacher then emphasizes their position without taking
other teaching on that subject seriously. They will become their own
“authority” on that subject and teach others how important that
is. They will ignore the established authority of the witness of the
Church or Traditional teaching.
There is a danger in identifying false teachers in contemporary
settings. In the apostolic era, false teaching could be compared to
the teaching of Jesus. As the apostles were sent out as the authority
on what Jesus said, any message that was taught only had to agree
with the apostolic witness. Over the course of 1900 years, though,
there have been increasing layers of Church Tradition and Authority.
To identify a false teacher, they have to be judged according to the
years of Tradition and Authority.
The diagram is a simple attempt to show the levels of Tradition and
Authority one would have to measure a false teaching. The central
message would be that of Christ's teaching as revealed through the
Gospel. After that would be the apostolic message of the early
letters in the rest of the New Testament. Following that, we would
compare to early writings of Bishops of the Church and the Councils
that established doctrinal boundaries. From those Councils, the
larger Traditions developed that would become the arms of
Christianity we have today (Orthodox, Catholic, Oriental, and to a
degree Protestant). Within each arm we would explore the distinct
Theological perspectives that have developed. And, finally, we
measure the parameters of the Denomination.
A teacher may seem to be teaching from a position of error if only
one area is emphasized. All levels of Tradition and Authority need
to be considered before claiming that someone is teaching in error.
Ezekiel Shepherd Template
Moral failure: Taking advantage of the people that are entrusted to a
leader for their own benefit; abuse
Modern examples: Leaders who abuse their followers through financial,
spiritual, sexual, emotional means
Biblical examples: Ezekiel 34; Matthew 18:4-14
Ezekiel is called to cry out against the “shepherds” of Israel.
The following judgment seems to identify these shepherds as the
leaders of the people. It does not distinguish whether these are
religious, political, or cultural. It would seem that the leaders are
taking advantage of the people to increase their own well-being. One
telling line is the condemnation of the hard and severe domination of
the people.
With “pastoral abuse” now an identified class of moral failure,
we can find this template still being lived out in churches. It does
not apply only to clergy, though. A lay leader can also be guilty of
abusing those that they lead.
Aaron Template
Moral failure: A leader is manipulated by the people into
compromising the moral and ethical standards
Modern example: A pastor puts themselves into a morally compromised
position by succumbing to influence of a morally compromised portion
of a congregation
Biblical example: Exodus 32; Galatians 2:11-13
Aaron and Peter, in the biblical examples, allowed the people around
them to influence their leadership. Aaron gave the Hebrews an idol.
Peter began to judge the Gentiles. Both of these individuals are
personally responsible for their actions. They cannot blame those
that were influencing them. But in community as connected as the
Hebrews or the Christians, when one side influences another because
of their moral failure, then we cannot allow one side to accept all
of the blame.
In this template, a leader is coerced into violating the moral and
ethical standards because the environment becomes difficult to lead
within. The leader, in an effort to maintain their “authority”,
gives into the pressure to conform to the larger group. Their
authority was already in question and their ability to lead is
already compromised. The resulting moral failure is magnified because
the leader is considered to be an example, a role-model. This isn't
just a moral failure of an individual. This is a moral failure of the
community.
Comments