On spiritual leaders and self-defence

One of the traps for insecure leaders is to make everything about them. It is all personal. It is not always easy to separate who we are from what we do, but if I make every issue about me, and interpret every criticism as personal rejection, I simply feed my insecurity and dismantle the possibility for constructive debate.

While that much is true, perhaps there is some apostolic precedent for self-defence in part of what Paul writes in 2 Corinthians where he mounts a fairly robust defence of his ministry, seemingly in the face of rivals who would have loved to discredit him. Discrediting Paul would have made it easier to discredit his message, so enticing the Corinthians to drift from their devotion to Christ.

Rather than list his triumphs, however, Paul lists the severe challenges he has had to face; he emphasises his weakness, recounting the time when he became a ‘basket case’ in Damascus, and the famous thorn in the flesh episode. Paul knew that ultimately he was accountable to God (12:19) and the motivation for his defending himself was for the strengthening of the Corinthians. As Don Carson points out, Paul is not writing to vindicate himself, as the Corinthians suspected, but to build them up.

Carson goes on to comment trenchantly:

Sadly too many leaders consciously or unconsciously link their own careers and reputations with the gospel they proclaim and the people they serve. Slowly, unnoticed by all but the most discerning, defense of the truth slips into self-defence, and the best interest of the congregation becomes identified with the best interest of the leaders. Personal triumphalism strikes again, sometimes with vicious intensity. It is found in the evangelical academic who invests all his opinions with the authority of Scripture, in the pastor whose every word is above contradiction, in the leader transparently more interested in self-promotion and the esteem of the crowd that in the benefit and progress of the Christians allegedly being served. It issues in political maneuvring, temper tantrums, a secular set of values (though never acknowledged as such), a smug and self-serving shepherd and hungry sheep.

A Model of Christian Maturity

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s