like a fire

Jesus Creed » Ted Haggard and the Evangelical Environment
Scott McKnight wrote an interesting post about Haggard and the gospel. He points out first of all that Haggard is in need of the gospel and we as Christians ought to be a part of giving him the gospel. What I really like about his post though, is what he points out for the rest of the church as a warning.

But, what I find here is what I want to call the evangelical environment. In evangelicalism, and the charismatic stream in which Ted Haggard swims, sin is bad and sin by leaders is real bad. This leads to a complex of features that creates a serious problem:

1. Christians, and not just pastors, do not feel free to disclose sins to anyone;
2. Christians, including pastors, sin and sin all the time;
3. Christians, including pastors, in evangelicalism do not have a mechanism of confession;
4. Christians and pastors, because of the environment of condemnation of sin and the absence of a mechanism of confession, bottle up their sins, hide their sins, and create around themselves an apparent purity and a reality of unconfessed/unadmitted sin.
5. When Christians do confess, and it is often only after getting caught, they are eaten alive by fellow evangelicals — thus leading some to deeper levels of secrecy and deceit.

What we saw with Haggard is not just about leaders; it is about all of us.

I agree with Scott that it just isn’t usually safe for anyone, but especially pastors, to be open and authentic in their struggles. Professionally, it just isn’t considered appropriate to talk about some of this stuff. Some of it would be great in maybe a small group setting or group of other pastors, but for the church on the whole, many people would just not be able or ready to see their spiritual leaders struggle with sin.

This really is the question.

Why isn’t it alright for people to see their leaders struggle? Why does it make most people lose confidence in their leaders? Is it because leadership is based on the wrong thing? Is it because our confidence in leaders is based on the very skewed thought that they have it all sorted out? If so, what should our confidence in leaders be?

I would love to hear.