Let's begin by playing a little game. I will list a few rather uncommon words, and you try to guess something of their meaning. The words are:
mesothelioma, erythremia, uremia, eritheia, mycetoma
They sound like medical conditions, don't they? In fact, four of these words denote a diseased condition of the body. One of these words denotes a diseased condition of the soul. Without reading further, looking in a dictionary or doing a Google search, can you tell which of the words denotes a soul disease?
* * *
Within the Church at large, there are those who are susceptible to many kinds of sins. They must constantly keep watch against their particular brand of weakness. But there is a sin which is much more damaging than most, because those who indulge in this sin do great damage to many others beside themselves. This sin is the lust for power over others. The Greek word frequently used in the original New Testament writings to describe this sin is eritheia.
In the New Testament, eritheia means “electioneering or intrigue”, that is, engaging in secret schemes to advance oneself or one's agenda within a church body. But the word has a rather interesting etymology. Originally it was derived from eritheuo, which means “to work for hire.” Thus eritheia originally denoted someone working for a wage. But later, the word came to mean someone who was interested only in his own personal gain. In the common, non-Biblical Greek usage of New Testament times, eritheia meant “...one who seeks political office for the fulfillment of his selfish ambitions and personal gains” (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Geoffrey William Bromiley, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1995).
Another source states the following: “Kittel (1:660) writes that Aristotle (the most famous and influential Greek philosopher) used eritheia when he wrote in Pol., V, 3, p. 1303a, 13 ff. to describe someone who was procuring public office by illegally manipulating the process. He used the word to refer to the attitude or spirit of what they were doing rather than a specific action. Kittel (1:660) also writes ... that eritheia was used in the civic oath of the Itanians: 'I will not on any pretext bring a charge of failure to keep civic law against any citizen for personal reasons.' The key portion of this oath lies in the word eritheia; it says basically that “I will not bring a charge that is motivated by eritheia.” Using the legal system of the state—authority greater than themselves and meant for the common good—for personal revenge or personal advancement was strictly forbidden. Kittel (1:660) records that Polybius (200?-118? B.C.; a Greek historian who wrote the 40 volume Universal History about the history of Roman conquest between 264 and 146 B.C. (Encarta)) used eritheia in X, 22:9 and in V, 2, p. 1302b, 4 to discuss someone influencing others for their own interest...” (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Gerhard Kittel, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1976; “Word Study of Hupokrisis and Eritheia,” Hans Mast, Sharon Mennonite Bible Institute, 1 December 2006, http://hansmast.com/media/Word%20Study.pdf)
In the New Testament, eritheia is demonstrated by the struggle among the 12 disciples to see which of them was the greatest. Later, it is seen in the churches at Corinth and Galatia with those who were trying to put themselves forward in order to gain a following, who fought against each other as rivals and who were warned thus by Paul: “But if you bite and devour one another, be careful that you don’t consume one another.” - Galatians 5:15, World English Bible. Eritheia is a sneaky sin – all “Hail fellow well met,” suave, smooth, agreeable and affable as long as it is getting its way, but explosive in its wrath when it is denied. It is uniquely a sin of the powerful, because those who rise to prominence in today's society are too often driven to power by the lust and ambition for power, and not by a genuine desire to serve their fellow human beings.
I assert that this sin is alive and well in the Church, and that this sin is the motivation behind many of the powerful figures in American evangelicalism. Eritheia is the sin of empire-builders, of those who seek to create their own private flock or kingdom or army of followers to indulge their ego-cravings. It is the sin of individuals who fight for control of a church so that they can say, “This is MINE!”
I am reminded of a TIME Magazine article from February 2005, entitled, “The 25 Most Influential Evangelicals in America.” The entire article was interesting, as it explored the intersection of American evangelicalism and politics (most of the individuals covered in the article were involved in politics, usually supporting the Republicans). One noteworthy person was Pennsylvania pastor Luis Cortes who admitted in a 2005 New York Times interview that he endorsed President Bush because of the money that the Bush Administration provided to his organization, Nueva Esperanza, through the Administration's faith-based charities initiative, as noted here: FindArticles - Show Me The Money!: Pastor Says He'll Trade Support For Cash
Church & State, Jul/Aug 2005. Mr. Cortes seemed to imply that he would endorse anyone as long as they provided money to his organization, and he seemed confident of his ability to use his clout to extort the requisite cash from politicians.
But the most riveting part of the article wasn't in words. Rather, it was a picture of T.D. Jakes. You can only find the picture in paper copies of the magazine; forget about trying to find it on line. In that picture, Mr. Jakes is facing the camera, holding a Bible and dressed in a dark suit, while in the background is the rich woodwork of the massive meeting hall of his church. The look on his face is what arrested me. It was a look of absolute authority, of absolute command, of stern possession; a look which shouted “MINE!”
It was also a profoundly insecure look, full of tragedy.
Maybe I'm reading too much into one look; I certainly don't know Mr. Jakes personally. But the attitude which that look conveyed was no doubt present in many of the other people profiled in the TIME article, even if they were more skillful in controlling their faces to hide it. That attitude is alive and well in many big-time evangelical figures, and in many megachurch and small-time “wanna-be-megachurch” pastors, no matter how charming they may seem on the outside. But that attitude always brings with it certain actions which have the purpose of enslaving and exploiting others. That attitude is the hallmark of leaders of abusive churches. This whole blog, TH in SoC, began, in part, as my attempt to sort out the damage done to me by an abusive church, and to make some sense of why, even after leaving that church, I was unable to find another church where I did not feel threatened. Admittedly, my old church was out in the fringes, full of strange practices and even stranger people (some who left that church can truthfully state that I was also a little bit strange while I was there). The problem I found afterward was that I kept finding churches where I encountered the same old power plays and dominance games that were played in my old church, even among churches that were supposed to be “normal” and “healthy.” This has led me to believe that the problem of power abuse in churches is much more widespread than the evangelical community would like to admit.
Those who are driven by eritheia to build a church empire for themselves always leave a trail of wounded people behind them. They try to hide this fact, at first denying that there are any problems within their churches or church organizations. If denial doesn't work, they try to demonize their accusers, saying things like, “You're blaspheming the Holy Spirit!”, or “Don't complain against the Lord's servant!”, or, “You're not being submissive!”, or “Touch not the Lord's anointed!” They may go on to say that the accusations are the work of the Devil, or that they dishonor Christ, or that they hinder the Gospel and the work of the Lord. Yet the damage done by these empire-builders cannot be hidden forever. It does no good to put a smiling face on the problem, hoping that it will go away by itself, nor does it help to pretend that the problem doesn't exist, because the unsaved and/or “unchurched” who are lured into involvement with such church empires, who get used up and abused and shoved out the back door of such empires are an undeniable proof of the damage done by such empires.
And these victims are finding their voices. From personal stories appearing in Churches That Abuse (Ron Enroth, Zondervan Publishing House, 1992) and The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse (David Johnson and Jeff Van Vonderen, Bethany House Publishers, 1991), to the hundreds of blogs now appearing on the Internet, abused people are telling their tales. The best way to prevent more damage to the testimony of the Church is not to pretend that power abuse doesn't exist, but to confront the problem bravely, so that it may be fixed. The next several posts of this blog will attempt to do just that. Drawing on my own personal experience, I will examine characteristics typical of authoritarian “fringe” churches. Then I will describe some troubling trends in many supposedly “mainstream,” popular present-day American evangelical movements – trends toward concentration of church authority in the hands of a few without adequate checks and balances to prevent the abuse of that authority. I will also discuss the social implications for the megachurch phenomenon in view of the problems which many large institutions will have in an era of declining availability of energy, finances and natural resources. Lastly, I will propose safeguards against the abuse of power in the Church.
One more thing. I want to make it clear that while there are definite problems with power and authority within American evangelicalism today, not all churches are weird or dangerous places, to be avoided at all costs. In fact, there are many churches in the United States which are attended by genuine, gracious people. And there are many sincere Christians, gracious and charitable, truly “the salt of the earth.” But it's time to learn the difference between the wheat and the tares (Matthew 13:24-30).
In the New Testament, eritheia means “electioneering or intrigue”, that is, engaging in secret schemes to advance oneself or one's agenda within a church body. But the word has a rather interesting etymology. Originally it was derived from eritheuo, which means “to work for hire.” Thus eritheia originally denoted someone working for a wage. But later, the word came to mean someone who was interested only in his own personal gain. In the common, non-Biblical Greek usage of New Testament times, eritheia meant “...one who seeks political office for the fulfillment of his selfish ambitions and personal gains” (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Geoffrey William Bromiley, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1995).
Another source states the following: “Kittel (1:660) writes that Aristotle (the most famous and influential Greek philosopher) used eritheia when he wrote in Pol., V, 3, p. 1303a, 13 ff. to describe someone who was procuring public office by illegally manipulating the process. He used the word to refer to the attitude or spirit of what they were doing rather than a specific action. Kittel (1:660) also writes ... that eritheia was used in the civic oath of the Itanians: 'I will not on any pretext bring a charge of failure to keep civic law against any citizen for personal reasons.' The key portion of this oath lies in the word eritheia; it says basically that “I will not bring a charge that is motivated by eritheia.” Using the legal system of the state—authority greater than themselves and meant for the common good—for personal revenge or personal advancement was strictly forbidden. Kittel (1:660) records that Polybius (200?-118? B.C.; a Greek historian who wrote the 40 volume Universal History about the history of Roman conquest between 264 and 146 B.C. (Encarta)) used eritheia in X, 22:9 and in V, 2, p. 1302b, 4 to discuss someone influencing others for their own interest...” (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Gerhard Kittel, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1976; “Word Study of Hupokrisis and Eritheia,” Hans Mast, Sharon Mennonite Bible Institute, 1 December 2006, http://hansmast.com/media/Word%20Study.pdf)
In the New Testament, eritheia is demonstrated by the struggle among the 12 disciples to see which of them was the greatest. Later, it is seen in the churches at Corinth and Galatia with those who were trying to put themselves forward in order to gain a following, who fought against each other as rivals and who were warned thus by Paul: “But if you bite and devour one another, be careful that you don’t consume one another.” - Galatians 5:15, World English Bible. Eritheia is a sneaky sin – all “Hail fellow well met,” suave, smooth, agreeable and affable as long as it is getting its way, but explosive in its wrath when it is denied. It is uniquely a sin of the powerful, because those who rise to prominence in today's society are too often driven to power by the lust and ambition for power, and not by a genuine desire to serve their fellow human beings.
I assert that this sin is alive and well in the Church, and that this sin is the motivation behind many of the powerful figures in American evangelicalism. Eritheia is the sin of empire-builders, of those who seek to create their own private flock or kingdom or army of followers to indulge their ego-cravings. It is the sin of individuals who fight for control of a church so that they can say, “This is MINE!”
I am reminded of a TIME Magazine article from February 2005, entitled, “The 25 Most Influential Evangelicals in America.” The entire article was interesting, as it explored the intersection of American evangelicalism and politics (most of the individuals covered in the article were involved in politics, usually supporting the Republicans). One noteworthy person was Pennsylvania pastor Luis Cortes who admitted in a 2005 New York Times interview that he endorsed President Bush because of the money that the Bush Administration provided to his organization, Nueva Esperanza, through the Administration's faith-based charities initiative, as noted here: FindArticles - Show Me The Money!: Pastor Says He'll Trade Support For Cash
Church & State, Jul/Aug 2005. Mr. Cortes seemed to imply that he would endorse anyone as long as they provided money to his organization, and he seemed confident of his ability to use his clout to extort the requisite cash from politicians.
But the most riveting part of the article wasn't in words. Rather, it was a picture of T.D. Jakes. You can only find the picture in paper copies of the magazine; forget about trying to find it on line. In that picture, Mr. Jakes is facing the camera, holding a Bible and dressed in a dark suit, while in the background is the rich woodwork of the massive meeting hall of his church. The look on his face is what arrested me. It was a look of absolute authority, of absolute command, of stern possession; a look which shouted “MINE!”
It was also a profoundly insecure look, full of tragedy.
Maybe I'm reading too much into one look; I certainly don't know Mr. Jakes personally. But the attitude which that look conveyed was no doubt present in many of the other people profiled in the TIME article, even if they were more skillful in controlling their faces to hide it. That attitude is alive and well in many big-time evangelical figures, and in many megachurch and small-time “wanna-be-megachurch” pastors, no matter how charming they may seem on the outside. But that attitude always brings with it certain actions which have the purpose of enslaving and exploiting others. That attitude is the hallmark of leaders of abusive churches. This whole blog, TH in SoC, began, in part, as my attempt to sort out the damage done to me by an abusive church, and to make some sense of why, even after leaving that church, I was unable to find another church where I did not feel threatened. Admittedly, my old church was out in the fringes, full of strange practices and even stranger people (some who left that church can truthfully state that I was also a little bit strange while I was there). The problem I found afterward was that I kept finding churches where I encountered the same old power plays and dominance games that were played in my old church, even among churches that were supposed to be “normal” and “healthy.” This has led me to believe that the problem of power abuse in churches is much more widespread than the evangelical community would like to admit.
Those who are driven by eritheia to build a church empire for themselves always leave a trail of wounded people behind them. They try to hide this fact, at first denying that there are any problems within their churches or church organizations. If denial doesn't work, they try to demonize their accusers, saying things like, “You're blaspheming the Holy Spirit!”, or “Don't complain against the Lord's servant!”, or, “You're not being submissive!”, or “Touch not the Lord's anointed!” They may go on to say that the accusations are the work of the Devil, or that they dishonor Christ, or that they hinder the Gospel and the work of the Lord. Yet the damage done by these empire-builders cannot be hidden forever. It does no good to put a smiling face on the problem, hoping that it will go away by itself, nor does it help to pretend that the problem doesn't exist, because the unsaved and/or “unchurched” who are lured into involvement with such church empires, who get used up and abused and shoved out the back door of such empires are an undeniable proof of the damage done by such empires.
And these victims are finding their voices. From personal stories appearing in Churches That Abuse (Ron Enroth, Zondervan Publishing House, 1992) and The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse (David Johnson and Jeff Van Vonderen, Bethany House Publishers, 1991), to the hundreds of blogs now appearing on the Internet, abused people are telling their tales. The best way to prevent more damage to the testimony of the Church is not to pretend that power abuse doesn't exist, but to confront the problem bravely, so that it may be fixed. The next several posts of this blog will attempt to do just that. Drawing on my own personal experience, I will examine characteristics typical of authoritarian “fringe” churches. Then I will describe some troubling trends in many supposedly “mainstream,” popular present-day American evangelical movements – trends toward concentration of church authority in the hands of a few without adequate checks and balances to prevent the abuse of that authority. I will also discuss the social implications for the megachurch phenomenon in view of the problems which many large institutions will have in an era of declining availability of energy, finances and natural resources. Lastly, I will propose safeguards against the abuse of power in the Church.
One more thing. I want to make it clear that while there are definite problems with power and authority within American evangelicalism today, not all churches are weird or dangerous places, to be avoided at all costs. In fact, there are many churches in the United States which are attended by genuine, gracious people. And there are many sincere Christians, gracious and charitable, truly “the salt of the earth.” But it's time to learn the difference between the wheat and the tares (Matthew 13:24-30).
No comments:
Post a Comment