Defeater Ethics: Abuse in the Church
Loving Jesus in spite of abuse from his followers.
The objections we have addressed thus far in our defeater ethics series are ethical dilemmas pertaining to God himself. However, many objections to God’s goodness have nothing to do with God per se. Instead, they are rooted in the ethical failures of Christians, which others understandably associate with Christianity. Arguably, the most significant and certainly the most painful of these is the dilemma of church abuse. From the more overt sexual abuse epidemic receiving its long-overdue exposure to the more covert forms of spiritual abuse, ecclesial harm remains a seemingly insurmountable barrier to the Christian faith for many.
Speaking as one with extensive experience on this painful topic, I understand it is much more than a mere objection. Because of the entanglement of God and the inflected harm, it becomes a unique trauma with equally unique consequences. Harm inflicted by someone in a position of power at a workplace, for example, brings a PTSD association with that office or company, but harm inflicted by a pastor leads to PTSD associations with a Church, Christianity, or even Christ himself. Therefore, allow me to offer some thoughts with the seriousness and sensitivity this painful topic deserves.
First and foremost, it is important to acknowledge that the abuse crisis is not exclusive to Christianity. Our society is undergoing a much-needed reckoning with abusive authority, and what is manifestly apparent is no institution or community is exempt. Consider, for example, the “me too” movement. Courageous abuse survivors came forward with their stories, marking them on social media with #metoo. Tragically, the hashtag transcended every normal societal divide. Republicans and Democrats, elites and working class, religious and irreligious, metropolitan cities and middle America—none were exempt from #metoo exposure.
This ubiquity of abuse in no way excuses church abuse. As I’ve already said, harm via spiritual authority is uniquely harmful. But I am asking us to consider that if instances of abuse automatically disqualify an organization or community, then name anything that is qualified. The answer is nothing. Nothing and nobody can be trusted but myself, which is where we are turning as a society.
All authority, except the authority of self, is to be distrusted or even rejected. There are a lot of discussions about the rejection of external authority and the rise of radical individualism, but a contributing factor that does not receive enough attention is that our society is finally being honest about the inevitably abusive nature of power in our world. As power continues to prove harmful, people are understandably turning away from authority in favor of autonomy.
But this, too, presents a problem. Individual autonomy proves equally as harmful as external authority. My biggest regrets, most painful wounds, and most destructive choices happen to be self-inflicted. Of course, I have been harmed by others, but nobody has harmed me more than me. And I don’t think I’m alone.
Herein is our sad state of affairs: Every form of power is susceptible to abuse, including the authority of autonomy. But would you consider that despite the many failures of Christian authority, there remains the hidden treasurer of Christ’s authority? Jesus gets angriest at harmful religious leaders because their abusive power is a barrier to his healing power. Nobody, and this is not an overstatement, does authority like Jesus.
Where does the notion of abusive power come from in the first place? When did it become a basic assumption that the strong should not harm the weak? Who says authority should be used not for selfish gain but for the blessing and betterment of those under the authority? Historically speaking, this vision of power is an anomaly. History is nothing but a struggle to gain power to use power for selfish gain. This is true of every society, nation, culture, and movement, including modern secularism. When enlightened moderns rebuke harmful power, we undermine our foundational premise that humanity has survived and advanced via the Darwinian power struggle of the strong devouring the weak. We did not arrive and survive through altruistic authority but through merciless power. And yet, it remains our basic assumption that authority should not act this way. Why and how did we come to this counter-historical conclusion?
Everything changed when Jesus of Nazareth came onto the scene with the good news of his subversive power. And then this same Jesus inaugurated a revolution with this redefined power at its core, revolutionizing the world as we know it. Ironically, when we rightfully rebuke abusive Christian authority, we borrow from the Christian worldview to do so. When people understandably want nothing to do with Jesus because of the harm inflicted by supposed followers of Jesus, they are invoking a vision of power that originates in Jesus to reject Jesus.
And so my only request is that you not allow harm done in the name of Jesus to keep you from the beautiful name of Jesus.
Who is this man to whom belongs all authority in heaven and earth but who leverages all that authority to proclaim good news to the poor? Who is this man with omnipotent power who became obedient unto death, even death on a cross? Who is this Lord who washes his follower’s feet? Who is this King who dies for His subjects? Who is this Master whose yoke is easy and whose burden is light? His name is Jesus. His power is our salvation, his authority is our liberty, and his Lordship is our life.
I am so sorry you were harmed in the name of Jesus, but please do not give up on Jesus. Every ounce of his power and authority exists not to harm but to heal, not to gain but to give, not to exploit but to exalt. Jesus Christ is the only authority worthy of your full surrender.