Second Chances in Leadership
It’s likely for anyone who has followed church news, especially over the past two decades, to think of numerous scandals when conversations about moral failure within the church come up. Obviously, there are the major ones like Ravi Zacharias, Carl Lentz, and Mark Driscoll or the denomination-wide scandals as seen in the Catholic church and across the SBC. Then, there are the smaller stories, the ones that don’t necessarily make the headlines such as one in Virginia who was forced to fire and excommunicate one of their pastors after he had an affair with a congregant and was unrepentant. While a great deal could be written about how leaders and churches find themselves in these positions, there appears to be less said about the aftermath of such a situation. If there is, it’s generally from a cancel culture that demands the necks of anyone they deem to be too far gone or beyond redemption. This shouldn’t be the final reality though, there needs to be a fair evaluation of every person and situation before judgements are made.
When a leader falls, it generally leads to many other issues including distrust, individuals becoming disenfranchised with the church, and a lot of finger pointing. Dealing with the aftermath starts with a recognition that people were hurt, an evaluation of what must be done concerning what went wrong, and a plan for reconciliation because whether the leader is ever in leadership again, their soul and salvation must be dealt with. Many church leaders say a chance for redemption and repentance should be extended to leaders who have fallen, should certainly criteria be met. Dave Miller, a writer for the SBC said in an article on the subject, “the qualities defined in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 are about what we are, not what we used to be. Every one of those qualities is developed over time by the inner work of the Holy Spirit. So, if we recognize that the Spirit can build the godly character necessary to lead over time…why would we not believe that he can rebuild it?”[1] The point Miller makes is fair to the overall argument with the caveat that there may still be consequences of the transgression. An acquaintance of mine one such example. As a youth pastor, he found himself in a one-on-one counseling session with a teenage girl while he was near 40 at the time. This individual was struggling to find validation and love and instead of finding her people who could do that well, this pastor took this challenge upon himself and one thing led to another and he wound up sleeping with her. This obviously ended his career in youth ministry but by the grace of God, it didn’t end his marriage and although he became a registered sex offender, he avoided having to do prison time. Nearly 25 years later, this individual has a restored marriage and works in church ministry, this time in an executive setting. The consequences of his actions decades ago have permanently banned him from ever working with youth or young people ever again. Today, he is passionate about redemption and the reality that God can and does restore people who have failed. However, he is equally passionate about prevention and trying to help leaders build habits into their lives that will help to keep them from making the same mistakes he made. It may also be worth noting that my friend never sought to re-enter the ministry himself. He believed his time in ministry service was over but another church happened to reach out to him and offer him an opportunity to serve again. Humility plays a big role in determining whether someone is ready to re-enter ministry service. If someone seems to only care about going through the steps of redemption, just in hopes of being restored to their position, what does this say about their repentance and humility level?
The steps towards redemption, according to Jonathan Daugherty the founder of Be Broken, an organization that focuses on sexual purity, consists of repentance, reconciliation, and then restoration.[2] Without the first step, neither of the other two can be reached. An independent church in Indiana is a place where these steps have been lived out well. A couple of years ago, two members of the staff were found to be having an affair. Once this was brought to light, both were terminated and the church issued formal discipline on both of them. This included being both discreet but also transparent with the entire congregation of the transgression and the process that would occur for them to return to being active members of the church. The church also provided counseling and other assistance to these individuals as they sought to repair their marriages and family relationships. Sometime later, both of these former leaders made public confessions and apologies to the church, and in turn the congregation opened the opportunity for reconciliation. While restoration to their leadership positions hasn’t and may never occur, both of these people are no longer viewed by the congregation in light of their downfall but rather through their identity as redeemed individuals by the grace of God, a perspective that should be had of every believer. While not everyone will have their darkest sin exposed to the whole world, every single person is in need of redemption.
Just because a leader goes through the process of repentance, reconciliation, and restoration, doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be extra accountability. There is the ethical element worth noting but it should be fairly obvious that supervision and response to a ministry leader convicted of child rape will and should be far different than someone who had an affair. No one is past forgiveness or consequences either. As mentioned earlier, there will likely still be consequences and stricter accountability is one of them. The work of fallen leaders will always come under more scrutiny after failure, including what was done or published previously but especially what is done afterwards. The reverse though may be more valid. If a leader has published books on godliness or leadership and then commits great sin, the validity of that wisdom and insight should be questioned since they were obviously not living it. This doesn’t mean that everything they said wasn’t valid or the truth, Ravi Zacharias’ writings are still very foundational to understanding and standing up for Christianity. On the flip side of this though, instead of becoming extra critical of the work of a leader following their downfall, reading and understanding from what they learned and how they’ve changed could provide valuable insight in not making the same mistakes they did. 1 Peter 4:7-8 says, “but the end of all things is at hand; therefore, be serious and watchful in your prayers. And above all things have fervent love for one another, for “love will cover a multitude of sins.” The writings of fallen leaders should be taken seriously, with prayer and careful consideration, but also while recognizing that God can and often does use broken people again to fulfill His plans and purposes. These leaders don’t have to forever be defined by their “fallenness” but rather by the redemptive story God is now writing with their surrendered, humbled, and repentant heart. It takes a willingness to love past the wrong, but that can and will result in reconciled relationships and restored instruments in the hand of God.
[1] Miller, Dave. “Can a Fallen Leader Be Restored?” SBC Voices, 19 Nov. 2014, sbcvoices.com/can-a-fallen-leader-be-restored/. Accessed 15 Mar. 2025.
[2] Daugherty, Jonathan. “The Christian Response to Moral Failure in Church Leaders.” Be Broken, 5 Apr. 2021, www.bebroken.org/post/the-christian-response-to-moral-failure-in-church-leaders.
Comments
Post a Comment