This generation needs courageous pastors. Every generation does. Shepherds are charged with guarding and protecting the flock of God from harm, and there’s plenty of that out there, whether in the form of wolves or thieves—predators within or bullies without. Faced with threats to the church and with an Enemy who always seeks to kill and destroy, pastors need to lead clearly and bravely. We need courageous shepherds.
This generation has suffered under overbearing leaders. Again, perhaps every generation has. But recent years have seen a reckoning: a recognition that far too many men (and they’re almost always men) have trampled over the flocks under their care, fleecing and exploiting rather than feeding and tending them. Several high-profile ministry leaders have been exposed as abusive. Others have been challenged and have closed ranks. Some leaders have repented and stepped down; still others have claimed to repent and then started up again as if nothing happened. Even now, I doubt the reckoning is over. The fallout certainly isn’t.
Accentuating each of these challenges is the existence of the other one. Many an overbearing leader has remained in place and retained support from his team by portraying himself as courageous and his critics as cowardly, spineless, effeminate, or oversensitive. Equally, I suspect many pastors have failed to address clear errors, abuses, divisions, and sins in the church, or immaturity and underperformance in their staff teams, because they fear that to do so would make them strident, overweening, overbearing bullies.
The presence of each error provides cover for its opposite. Cowardice and heavy-handedness are symbiotic.
We all want to have or be courageous pastors—not overbearing leaders. How do we tell the difference? Some Christian leaders know perfectly well that their behavior is abusive and evil; it’s difficult to sexually assault someone without realizing you are doing so. But I suspect many people become domineering and overbearing without realizing the extent to which they have. That’s partly why they’re so resistant to the charge when it comes—sin almost always involves self-deception.
What are the defining traits in each case? How might recognizing them help us grow into courage without becoming overbearing?
Biblical Portraits
An obvious place to start is with the biblical qualifications for eldership. (I use the NIV throughout; all emphases are mine.) Several of Paul’s criteria in 1 Timothy 3:1–7 warn against an explosive, hectoring, or domineering use of authority: “Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money . . .”
At the same time, throughout this letter, Paul urges Timothy not to be squeamish about confronting those who are threatening the church, using robust and even military language: “command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer” (1:3), “fight the battle well” (1:18), “command and teach these things” (4:11), “those elders who are sinning you are to reprove before everyone” (5:20), “fight the good fight of the faith” (6:12), “command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant” (6:17), “guard what has been entrusted to your care” (6:20).
The same both/and is present in Titus 1:7–11:
Since an overseer manages God’s household, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. Rather, he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. They must be silenced . . .
We find it in 1 Thessalonians 5:12–15:
Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. Hold them in the highest regard in love because of their work. Live in peace with each other. And we urge you, brothers and sisters, warn those who are idle and disruptive, encourage the disheartened, help the weak, be patient with everyone.
It also comes across beautifully in 2 Timothy 2, which begins with a call to strength and resilience, like that of a soldier or farmer or athlete (vv. 1–7), and ends by insisting that “the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone,” and that “opponents must be gently instructed” (vv. 24–25).
Again, 1 Peter 5:2–11 has a similar balance:
Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; not lording it 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 will never fade away. In the same way, you who are younger, submit yourselves to your elders. All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because “God opposes the proud but shows grace to the humble.” Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you. Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that the family of believers throughout the world is undergoing the same kind of sufferings. And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast. To him be the power for ever and ever. Amen.
Notice the ease with which the apostles move between calls to strength, courage, fortitude, resilience, and resistance on the one hand and gentleness, humility, self-control, kindness, and care on the other. In healthy churches and healthy individuals, they’re two sides of the same coin.
The apostles move between calls to strength, courage, fortitude, resilience, and resistance on the one hand and gentleness, humility, self-control, kindness, and care on the other.
Both sides were needed in biblical times because overbearing leadership isn’t a modern invention. It’s plain in the pages of the New Testament. Third John, to take a prominent example, addresses the problem of a certain Diotrephes: “[He] loves to be first, [and] will not welcome us” (v. 9). Jude describes shepherds “who feed only themselves” and seek power through a combination of boasting, flattery, and slander (vv. 11–16).
The writers in each case respond to such overbearing leadership with courageous confrontation, not squishy evasion. “When I come, I will call attention to what he is doing,” says the elder (3 John 10). Jude is even punchier: “Contend for the faith that was entrusted once and for all to the saints. For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you” (vv. 3–4).
We don’t have to choose between men of jelly and men of steel. It’s possible to shepherd with courage and compassion, humility and bravery, clarity and charity. Correcting your opponents with gentleness (2 Tim. 2:25) requires no less.
Contemporary Sketches
How do we tell the difference between courageous pastors and overbearing leaders today? This is important to ask, because while few pastors will mentally (let alone verbally) dismiss the importance of biblical qualifications for eldership, we may fail to recognize we’re falling foul of them.
A similar error can be true of fellow elders, staff, and church members, especially where there’s a significant power imbalance. It feels like a serious charge to say of one’s pastor that he’s domineering or lacking in self-control, so people usually don’t speak up. But if presented with a list of more descriptive characteristics, they might recognize something they’d otherwise miss.
Drawing on the wisdom of one of my fellow elders, here I present 20 contrasts between the two types. This list isn’t exhaustive, but it may help.
Overbearing Leaders
Courageous Pastors
Are difficult to question or challenge
Invite feedback and correction
Are defensive in response to criticism
Are quick to weigh criticism and apologize
Cause apprehension or fear in the team/church
Cause security and stability in the team/church
Are quick to play the “loyalty card”
Are committed to earning and re-earning trust
Take disagreements personally
Distinguish disagreements from attack
Are threatened by gifted individuals
Are secure alongside gifted individuals
Have a sense of entitlement with respect to pay, title, honor, etc.
Seek the honor, pay, or recognition of others
Are insecure and prickly
Don’t take themselves too seriously
Require quick assent from the team
Give the team space to process and develop
Are above the rules, processes, and procedures
Establish and submit to good processes
Lack self-awareness about weaknesses
Are self-aware and emotionally intelligent
Have a visible “outside” is bigger than their “inside”
Have an invisible “inside” that is bigger than their “outside”
Hold on to power and influence
Delegate, empower, and release
Avoid peer-to-peer accountability
Prize and pursue peer-to-peer accountability
See submission as a one-way street
Practice mutual submission
Promote a culture of conformity
Promote a culture of diversity
Don’t mix with ordinary church members
Are hospitable and approachable
Frequently use “God told me to . . .”
Are consultative
Are emotionally volatile
Are emotionally self-controlled
Are proud
Are humble
Both of these are sketches, even cartoons. Few pastors are as bad as the left-hand column, and few consistently live up to everything on the right. But as a diagnostic tool, this chart has helped me better see myself and the team I’m part of, and it’s helped me understand and learn from what has gone wrong in other situations.
Somehow, translating the biblical language into explanations of the dynamics that occur daily in pastoral ministry makes it easier to see the potential problems. It also makes it easier to ask colleagues “Do you find X approachable and consultative?” rather than “Is X an overbearing leader?” I particularly like to ask junior colleagues these questions; most of us reveal our character flaws more when we interact with people we see as “under” us than we do with our peers or with people “over” us.
The root of the differences relates to biblical qualifications. Gentleness (as opposed to violence) and humility (as opposed to pride) are indispensable for shepherds. Put positively, humble men and women are just about the most admirable and beautiful beings God has created.
Humble men and women are just about the most admirable and beautiful beings God has created.
Put negatively, something like the following has happened to me often enough not to be a coincidence: I’m at a conference when I meet a gifted individual I’ve heard of, and I talk to him for a while and see the way he interacts with me and others. He strikes me as somehow lacking in humility, or gentleness, or both, and I mention my discomfort to my wife afterward and wonder if it’s just me, given the person’s position and reputation. Then within a few years, or even months, we hear his ministry has imploded in some way. God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.
What Can Churches Do?
All this raises the key practical question: What can churches do to ensure their pastors are more like the right-hand column than the left? How can churches hold their pastors accountable if they’re not? Both the institutional church and individual church members have responsibilities here.
Institutionally, churches can make feedback and accountability as easy as possible through a combination of church surveys, staff appraisals, clear job descriptions, anonymous staff-culture surveys, a competent and empowered board, and rigorous HR processes. (Not all these details will translate into every church setting, but this has been the pattern of good practice we’ve sought to adopt in ours.)
Individually, it’s all too easy to say church members should simply speak to the leader in question about their concerns. But in cases of heavy (or even abusive) leadership, this could be disastrous advice. In a controlling environment, even fellow pastors or staff members may be inclined to close ranks around the leader rather than challenge him.
So as church members, we may need to speak to people in authority who are a degree removed from the situation; in our case, that might be one of our marketplace elders, the board of trustees, or denominational or network leaders who provide oversight and outside input to the church. If no such individuals or institutions exist, or church members have no way of knowing who these leaders are, that’s probably a red flag.
Ultimately, we take our pastoral cues from the Good Shepherd, who came that we might have life and have it more abundantly. He’s no pushover. He has a rod and a staff, and he makes a feast in the presence of our enemies. But his rod and staff are a comfort to us. He restores our souls, leads us beside still waters, and makes us lie down in green pastures. He’s clear about the dangers of thieves and robbers and wolves; he sharply distinguishes himself from hired hands who are too scared to confront them, and he’s ready to die for his sheep.
But oh, what a tender Shepherd he is. His sheep know his voice. He knows his own, and his own know him. He longs for his sheep to find pasture, life, and perfect unity under his pastoral care, and he’s prepared to pay the ultimate price to ensure they do.
Let us undershepherds go and do likewise.
The Gospel Coalition