The spiritually abusive leader creates an atmosphere of performance and law keeping that is beyond the reach of any Christian, even while publicly preaching and teaching the gospel of God’s grace.  Although he does not hold himself to the same standard (the definition of hypocrisy!), those closest to him may begin to live in a state of fear, subconsciously afraid that they are condemned by the program they are supporting. 

An elder and his wife have served faithfully for many years in a local church, but in recent years have felt a cloud of confusion and darkness. Although they hesitate to make the admission, a sense of inexplicable fear has crept into their Christian walk.  Church life has been tumultuous with conflict and departures a steady theme, but they tell themselves that the principles and actions of the leadership have been the tough-love sort of faithfulness.  Yet nagging questions arise.
This post is for those who may be on the inside of a leadership structure that has become spiritually abusive and do not recognize what they have become a part of.  They are witnesses to dynamics that are hidden to the broader congregation, but they themselves cannot presently interpret them properly, though they may sense something is wrong.  As Chuck DeGroat writes, Whole church systems and programs evolve within the waters of narcissism, and when it’s the water you swim in, it’s hard to see and even harder to confront.1
The distorting, deceiving power of a spiritually abusive leader is often underestimated.  Such a leader is usually remarkably gifted for ministry in ways which impress many and seem to confirm his calling.  To be close to such a leader and in his good graces can be a very positive environment, where individuals are made to feel that they are vital to the mission and loved deeply.  The inner circle of leadership and staff will be constantly complimented as “the best.”  And whatever events may transpire to expose the truth about underlying sin issues will be distorted and spun to maintain the narrative..
A key element of seeing through the smoke and mirrors is the issue of hypocrisy.  Jesus said, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy” (Luke 12:1).  This alarm is sounded because leaven starts small and unobtrusively but it is deadly.  There are brands of hypocrisy which are quite subtle, but nonetheless the hypocrisy eventually leavens the whole lump of the church.  Every Christian in spiritual leadership must be on the lookout, knowing the deceptiveness of sin.  In an abusive leadership structure, hypocrisy will unfailingly manifest itself.  What follows are some key areas to watch carefully and important questions to ask.
Partiality
Is a pastor or leader treated with greater deference and charity than others?  Are reports about the harshness, anger, or bullying from the leader quickly rationalized, discredited, or ignored, regardless of the fact that there is a steady stream over time of such reports?  When partiality is at work, these reports will be pre-judged as slanderous.   They will be explained as a convenient way for unrepentant sinners to shift blame.  If such reports come second hand, they will quickly be labeled “hearsay” and therefore dismissed without further investigation.   Those in Christian leadership need to understand that in cases of alleged abuse, victims often cannot and should not directly confront the abusive leader.  This does not mean that an impartial investigation cannot be conducted.
When a leader makes allegations or insinuations about others (and an abusive leader will do so repeatedly), are these accepted without questioning?  Are other individuals instantly blacklisted if he criticizes them?  Is his testimony elevated above that of others?  While elders and pastors need to talk amongst themselves in the course of shepherding, the swift and extreme denouncements an abusive leader will make on the thinnest of grounds are far outside the pale of shepherding.  The willingness of others in leadership allow this behavior and accept his judgments is an indicator of partiality. Giving such latitude to the leader while immediately bringing the hammer down on those who allege abuse is hypocrisy.
Confidentiality
Are discussions of potential weaknesses or missteps of the leadership viewed as slanderous?  Is asking questions suppressed and discouraged?  If individuals feel they have been mistreated, are they punished for seeking other counsel?  The ethical demand for confidentiality is first and foremost upon leaders entrusted with the care of souls.   They are handling the information of people who are vulnerable as they open up their lives and talk about their sins.  When leadership reverses this and demands that individuals under its authority remain silent about possible failings and abuses, or even demand that individuals remain silent about discussion of public actions, the leadership has hypocritically turned the principle of confidentiality on its head.
In a spiritually abusive system, when individuals do criticize the leadership, confidential issues in their lives will be brought forth to discredit them.  Insinuations will be made about them from the pulpit and in conversations.  The narcissistic leader will know no boundaries of confidentiality in order to neutralize the “threat.”  This demand for confidentiality with respect to the failings of the leadership while at the same time breaching confidentiality when it comes to others is hypocrisy.
The Best Staff, the Worst Staff
What is the track record of staff relationships?  Chuck DeGroat writes about how the narcissistic characteristics will manifest in a pastor’s relationship with his staff.  His need to be special and grandiose is affirmed by his “talented” staff, who stay if they live in service of his ego and leave, often messily, if they do not.  Is there a long line of staff departures with little explanation?
The hypocrisy is detectable in the fact that staff members will receive the highest praise, appear to be protected from outside criticisms, and be seemingly unable to do wrong in the leader’s eyes.  But what will seem most of the time like a very positive relationship with the staff actually is understood by his drive for grandiosity and need for people around him to enable him.  For staff, this can feel like working amid a hurricane.  The dizzying array of ideas and visions may be explained away by the pastor as “creativity” or “passion,” but a pastor who doesn’t see the impact… on a staff will quickly find a tired, overwhelmed team…One reason for this phenomenon is that the narcissistic pastor must live in a constant state of ego inflation.2
The flattery of the leader clashes with his unreasonable demands; requests made at all hours; changes to major programming at the last minute; new initiatives to organize and launch when already plates are overflowing.  But most revealingly is the steady stream of staff members over time who once received highest praise but were ultimately discredited or discarded due to the narcissistic patterns of broken relationships.  This hypocrisy will take place time and again.
Hierarchy/Tyranny
In some church settings, hierarchy is built into church government.  But in many churches, particularly those functioning in a Presbyterian manner or similarly, governance is explicitly to be conducted with the parity (equality) of elders.  The senior minister may be described as the “first among equals,” but the emphasis is on the “equals.”  Each man around the table has one vote, and none are to set themselves above the others.  If such is the expectation and standard of government, the question should be asked if that is actually taking place or has it become a hierarchy.  Unfailingly, the abusive pastor will work to take full functional control of the leadership.  This leads in the direction of not only hierarchy, but tyranny, hypocritically contradicting the church’s standards and the command of Christ (Matt 10:43).
This hierarchy will be evident in the near total deference to one man’s judgments on issues of significance.  Other intelligent, godly men who once were able to think for themselves will essentially function like yes-men; sycophants. Is there a leader at the table that everyone knows is above criticism?  Whoever holds such a position is controlling that body.  Are there gradations on the elder board: unspoken tiers or influence and authority, with those closest to the narcissistic leader being at the highest level?  Is there a pastor or leader who is highly critical of other leaders behind their backs, discrediting them – particularly those he perceives as a threat on some level?  Perhaps he quietly tells others that certain elders who raise questions are just not mature enough to see issues clearly.  Perhaps he makes quiet statements like, “that elder has utterly failed as a husband and father.”  This is to strategically put other leaders on a lower spiritual tier, functionally undermining the parity of elders.
Another question to consider is whether there is tolerance of behaviors from a leader that would be unacceptable in others.  Specifically, is a leader given freedom to express anger to a level that would be shocking if seen in others?  All of these marks are symptoms that the leadership has become hierarchical, and at the top is a tyrant.  This hypocrisy will be present in a spiritually abusive ministry.
Demonize with Standards for Them, but not for Me
A final form of hypocrisy takes place in the process of discrediting or demonizing people, which will be a theme for a spiritually abusive pastor who is constantly viewing critics as adversaries and pushing them out.  Is there a steady stream of criticism coming from a leader toward congregants and other leaders?  As Michael Kruger puts it, “A key characteristic of an abusive leader is that they lead through fault-finding.”3   In order to demonize a perceived opponent, actual sins or suspected sins in people’s lives will be brought forth and embellished.  At times they may be fabricated altogether, as the leader manipulates others to maintain his control.  As he does this, however, he is creating an untenable ethical atmosphere.  Sins that are common to all Christians such as lust, overeating, insecurity, worldliness, and many more, will be used to bring people’s integrity into question and discredit them to others.  “I am so disappointed that this elder bought a Mercedes. He is so worldly.” “She asked for prayer about the weather for the wedding; how incredibly immature, and evidence of her husband’s poor spiritual leadership.” “He admitted to having a momentary mental fantasy about a woman in the church – he is not safe around anyone.” “Did you see the political posts she made on Facebook? I am ashamed to be in the same church as such a woman.” This tactic works: it is effective at discrediting and neutralizing the perceived “threat” since the leader carries the weight of his spiritual authority behind such accusations.  But it also distorts the gospel and the grace of God.
The spiritually abusive leader creates an atmosphere of performance and law keeping that is beyond the reach of any Christian, even while publicly preaching and teaching the gospel of God’s grace.  Although he does not hold himself to the same standard (the definition of hypocrisy!), those closest to him may begin to live in a state of fear, subconsciously afraid that they are condemned by the program they are supporting.  This weakens the Christian in many ways and is an indicator that something is very wrong.  The leaven of the Pharisees has been sown into the dough.
A Warning to Leaders
For Christian leaders connected to such leadership, complicity is the grave danger.  Narcissistic leaders specialize in pushing out perceived adversaries and gathering loyal supporters to leadership.  These supporters will be trained and deployed to carry out the program of the leader.  Failing to recognize hypocrisy and call it what it is leads inevitably to enablement of the behaviors and participation.  As Michael Kruger points out, the biblical record of God’s judgment on Eli for enabling the abusive behavior of his sons in the temple reveals “a critically important principle: God will hold accountable not only the bad shepherd but also those who protect and enable them.  This is a weighty warning to all churches and the elder boards that lead them.”3
Participation in this sort of hypocrisy results in confusion, burden, and fear.  Are such fruits present in the heart and mind?  This is no fruit of the Spirit.  Indeed, it is a bellwether indicating something is diabolically wrong.  The deeper someone goes with such a leader, the more likely he or she will experience the rising sense of condemnation and fear as hypocrisy and legalism poison the well of grace found in the gospel alone. Confusion will enter as nothing and no one will be spared from being demonized and reality will be distorted.  The soul will be burdened tremendously, for this person is serving a man and not Christ (Gal. 1:10).
If these marks and signs are present in the church, seek help and have nothing to do with such “leaven” of hypocrisy.  “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Gal. 5:1).
Steven Light is a member of a Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) congregation in Jacksonville, Fla.

1DeGroat, Chuck & Mouw, Richard, When Narcissism Comes to Church: Healing Your Community From Emotional and Spiritual Abuse,. Intervarsity Press, 2020, Introduction.
2Ibid., ch 4.
3Kruger, Michael J., Bully Pulpit: confronting the problem of spiritual abuse in the church, Grand Rapids : Zondervan, 2022, p 28.
4Ibid, p 48.
Related Posts:

Shunning is more akin to the leadership of Diotrephes, exposed by the apostle John, than faithful church discipline.  “So if I come, I will bring up what he is doing, talking wicked nonsense against us. And not content with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers, and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church” (3 John 10).  The counterfeit stands in sharp contrast to the true principle.

A man who has left a church finds himself cut off from life-long friends.  An older couple is forced out by church leadership and is reduced to a surface level relationship with their adult children who remain.  A former member discovers that anytime she encounters people from the church, they act as if she does not exist.  What is going on?
Much has been written lately on the topic of abusive spiritual leadership.  In a series of blogposts, Michael Kruger provides a helpful definition in What Is Spiritual Abuse?, stating, “Spiritual abuse, then, is when a spiritual leader—such as a pastor, elder, or head of a Christian organization—wields his position of spiritual authority in such a way that he manipulates, domineers, bullies, and intimidates those under him, as a means of accomplishing what he takes to be biblical and/or spiritual goals.”  He unfolds key signs of an abusive pastor:  A Long Track Record of Broken Relationships, Hyper Defensive About their Own Authority, Overly Critical and Harsh with Others.1
The goal of this series is to further unmask spiritual abuse. As Chuck DeGroat writes, Congregants do not always have categories for what they may perceive from the outside to be occasional inconsistencies, frustrating drama, troubling rumors, or arrogant behaviors.  They’ll forgive these things for powerful sermons, persistent success, and perceived authority….And because narcissistic leaders appear so confident and certain, they tend to be believed.2  It is therefore important to be alert to the signs.
This post addresses the topic of shunning.  Shunning is present not only among cults but is prevalent among seemingly biblically orthodox groups with spiritually abusive leadership.  The popular podcast The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill brought this reality to light.  Often the congregation that is under such leadership will practice shunning to some extent under the guidance of the leadership, thinking they are being biblical and would not even know to name their actions with this word.
A Distorted Biblical Principle
Shunning is a counterfeit of a biblical principle.  Matthew 18:17 describes the culmination of church discipline.  “And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”  There is such a thing as rightly distancing oneself from an unrepentant person in the context of church discipline.  But in an abusive church, the principle is distorted and believers need to be on guard to recognize this.  Shunning goes beyond what is written (1 Corinthians 4:6) and does not align with biblical church discipline in at least four ways.
First, right church discipline occurs in the context of grave sin.  The Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) Book of Church Order, summarizing the requirements for excommunication states, “This censure is to be inflicted only on account of gross crime or heresy…”  A clear indicator of shunning is that the evidence of the “sins” of the shunned person will be thin.  Instead, insinuations will be made about a person’s character and rarely will there be something concrete. If there is, it won’t rise to the level of a chargeable offense, although the leadership may greatly exaggerate it.  The “sin” actually consists of disagreement with the leadership, but this fact is shuffled behind the other accusations that are brought forth.
Second, shunning does not have the redemptive quality that is requisite in church discipline.  Even at the final stage of church discipline in cases of unrepentance, treating someone as a “Gentile and a tax collector” nonetheless has at its heart, “I love you and I want your good.”  Shunning at its root is a “good riddance.”  It is to discard someone.  The coldness of it will be evident over time with repetition of occurrences.  Rather than the love which “always hopes” there is a sentiment more like, “you have to be willing to pull the trigger.”
Third, shunning will be recognizable by its high frequency in contrast to the general infrequency of loving and rightful church discipline.  Abusive spiritual leadership will shun people time and time again, whereas faithful church discipline by its very nature will be relatively rare.  Among the shunned will be saints known for their faithfulness, gray-headed servants of the church, kind-hearted and generous persons who have washed the feet of the saints, and many others.
Fourth, with shunning, often there will be no church discipline involved; a process demanding the rigor of due process, true shepherding, time, and layers of accountability due to the gravity of what is at stake.  This is not always the case, however.   In cases where excommunication is abusively applied, the damage is even worse as the keys of the kingdom are misused to bring terrible confusion and distortion upon victims.  Perhaps more often though, the leadership simply communicates to the church in various ways that certain people are to be totally avoided because they pose a “danger” to the church.  People disappear with little discussion or invitation for questions, except for insinuation about them.
Shunning is more akin to the leadership of Diotrephes, exposed by the apostle John, than faithful church discipline.  “So if I come, I will bring up what he is doing, talking wicked nonsense against us. And not content with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers, and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church” (3 John 10).  The counterfeit stands in sharp contrast to the true principle.
How It Works
How does the leadership accomplish this tactic in a congregation, particularly in a biblically orthodox setting?  Obviously in cult settings or false religions like Islam, it is built into the doctrine explicitly, but since this is not intrinsic to Christianity, the leadership must incrementally instill it.  This happens through a process something like the following:
Identifying “Threats”:  First, those who are perceived as a “threat” to power and control of the spiritually abusive leadership are marked.  This can happen in a few different ways.  Some individuals, by simply asking questions or raising concerns in the church in good faith are labeled a threat. This is due to the underlying control issues of the narcissistic leader. It may take place in the context of a controversy where leadership is domineering and anyone who questions is therefore marked.  It may also occur in the context of a counseling situation where a person disagrees with the leadership on some assessment of sin in themselves or others.  Simply leaving an abusive church may result in someone being thus marked.  The perceived threat to power or control is the key driving factor.
Exclusion: Second, the abusive leadership moves to push out the perceived threat.  There are multiple ways in which this happens.  It can be as simple as a cold shoulder: the person receives nonverbal cues that they are not wanted by the leadership.  Exclusion may be accomplished by veiled references with criticisms from the pulpit where the victim and others know who is being described.  It may be a more direct approach: telling them they probably would do better elsewhere.
Worst of all, it may be the full force of condemnation and accusation.  Pastoral knowledge of their lives or weaknesses may be marshaled against them abusively.  “Look at your life – you are an utter failure.  And you question me?”  Victims may find themselves berated, facing tremendous anger and rage designed to cow them into submission.  Even when individuals may have questioned the leadership, the force of spiritual authority and the collective power of a body of complicit leaders may convince them that the problem is indeed themselves.  This may be the worst scenario, as the victim finds himself under the terror of condemnation, believing that the anger he is receiving is the anger of God.  Sins are magnified in his own mind in a terrible distortion of reality.  The psychological toll is terrible.  But this tactic is effective: such persons are neutralized as a “threat”.  The misuse of spiritual authority is diabolically contrary to the commands of scripture for spiritual leaders and it can destroy people.
Discrediting and Demonizing:  Third, in order to minimize any potential damage to the leadership’s reputation and maintain control, individuals must be discredited.  Here is where the real work must be done upon a congregation to get them on board.  Those who have been marked and excluded continue to pose a threat because they may speak with persons in the congregation.  The more godly and mature the excluded person is, the more intently the leadership will have to work to discredit them.  This results in demonization.
The words of the Pharisees whose control was challenged by the formerly blind man are pertinent: “You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?” And they cast him out (John 9:34).  This will be the propaganda shared with the congregation. “Can you believe the utter sin of that person?”  Pastoral knowledge is once again inappropriately used, as failures and sins are brought out of confidentiality to discredit.  Sins may also be completely fabricated or embellished.  “He has completely failed in his marriage and parenting!”  “They have a problem with alcohol and were serving in leadership! How dark!”  The process may begin before the person has left the church, at times before the person even knows they are targeted, with insinuations and accusations made about them behind their back.  This is particularly bad if the person was in any sort of leadership, where they pose the greatest threat.
Full Shunning:  Fourth and finally, now the leadership can train the naive congregation to slowly accept this practice.  It takes place incrementally, with exhortations of “protecting the flock from dangerous people,” “purging the church from sin,” “not compromising,” “exerting tough love toward unrepentant people,” and “not allowing Satan a foothold” at the forefront.  These are convincing themes for biblical Christians who trust their leaders.  Although there may be no formal discipline, the character of the person is so slandered that others conclude they have reason to withdraw from them, and even a moral obligation.  Various avenues are used to push these principles.  The pulpit, private conversations, committee meetings, and public prayers become useful for insinuations.
It will not necessarily be the whole church that takes on this practice, but if the core of staff and leadership is convinced by the abusive leader to begin cutting off contact with a few people because of these principles, then the pattern will easily be replicated and expanded.  The leader therefore begins with strong pressure on the other leaders to do this.  Other involved members will pick up on the practice as it is now reinforced from multiple people.  Once the principles are inculcated with a core, it will spread. It becomes a powerful tool for control as well as instilling fear of disagreeing and being among “those compromised people” whose eternal destiny is called into question.
When it is leaders who step out of line and are excluded, they will quickly be erased.  Material from departed leaders is removed from websites, indicating silently that they are dangerous.  They may be forced to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) in order to receive a severance or if they are cowed and docile from the abusive mind control, they may be ordered to leave town.  But the demonization will be swift and the plan for shunning will advance.
Ultimately those who maintain any degree of connection, even the most basic formalities with shunned people, are pressured to cease and desist and may themselves be spiritually abused for failing to shun. “You are keeping a foot in the world.” “You are looking back at Sodom and Gomorrah like Lot’s wife.”  Heartbreaking stories unfold.  Long standing close relationships are ruptured.  Members are sometimes influenced to sever or curtail family bonds.  The closer the remaining individuals are to the core leadership, the more severe the pressure will be. Victims multiply.
The Root
In biblically orthodox contexts, often at the root of abusive leadership and shunning is the sort of self-idolatry commonly described as narcissism.  This takes the shape again and again of a charismatic figure, compelling in his leadership, capable in his use of scripture, remarkably gifted in different ways, yet underneath gripped by sins of great spiritual pride and need for control.  He labors to hide these from all people and especially from himself with ministerial activity and forms of piety.  He views himself as fundamentally different and above others and unable to begin to consider the possibility of something being so wrong within.  This leaves him with great insecurity and unable to receive criticism or be questioned in his judgment.  He excels in gathering others around him by flattery to serve as supporters, training and convincing them of his ways, but will swiftly crush them if he detects disloyalty.  Resources on this subject, including non-Christian ones such as narcwise.com, are useful to understand the mindset when read through biblical lenses.
Take Action
In the end, accusations against the brethren will not stand.  The Lord will vindicate his people.  Nonetheless, the damage done to lives through shunning and other aspects of spiritual abuse is real and terrible.  It is important to recognize shunning for what it is, along with other marks of spiritual abuse.  If you have concerns that such tendencies may be present in your church, read further resources on the topic and seek objective counsel and prayer from other Christians outside of your church.  Equipped with knowledge, prayer, and counsel, consider then asking questions of the leadership.  Ask direct questions about how they receive criticism and disagreement.  Be sure to ask the leadership if they are comfortable with you having friendships with people who have left the church.  Both the answers and the way you are treated after asking questions will be telling.
Any Christian leader should gladly welcome such questions with great transparency.  That will not be the case with abusive leadership where asking such questions will raise alarm and suspicion.  For this reason, prepare to ask such questions prayerfully, in the strength and freedom of the glorious gospel of grace.  When Christ’s grace is known, the fear of man has no power, as demonstrated by a formerly blind man long ago.  The man answered, “Why, this is an amazing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes (John 9:30).
Steven Light is a member of a Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) congregation in Jacksonville, Fla.

1 See also, Why Don’t Churches Stop Spiritually Abusive Pastors, and What Do You Do when an Abusive Leader Is Allowed to Remain in Ministry.  For books on the topic see Kruger, Michael J., Bully Pulpit: confronting the problem of spiritual abuse in the church, Grand Rapids : Zondervan, 2022. Also, Johnson, David W. and VanVonderen, Jeffrey, The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, Bethany House Publishers, 1991.  Also Three Recent Books on Narcissism and Spiritual Abuse in Church, Michael Gembola, Journal of Biblical Counseling, 35:3, pp 61-92.
2 When Narcissism Comes to Church: Healing Your Community From Emotional and Spiritual Abuse, Chuck DeGroat & Richard Mouw. Intervarsity Press, 2020, ch 4.
Related Posts: