Introduction
A painful feature of the modern church is the glaring contrast between the New Testament exhortations concerning Christian spirituality and the actual state of the people of God. In this paper I want to examine how prevalent leadership patterns are a major cause of the declining Christian morality, especially in shaping the church as a shame-based culture.
Paul commands us, “let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and of spirit, making holiness perfect in the fear of God.” (2 Cor 7:1). Likewise, Peter says, “Instead, as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct; for it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” (1 Pet 1:5- 16). Jesus warns a “good church”, “I know your works; you have a name of being alive, but you are dead.Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is on the point of death, for I have not found your works perfect in the sight of my God.” (Rev 3:1- 2).
In contradiction to the expectations of scripture, what is happening to the morality o f the church? Comprehensive figures from the U.S. show no significance in divorce rates, little differences in sexual behaviour and greater rates of racism ignorance in the evangelical church compared to the general population (www.dbu.edu/naugle). Personal evidence suggests much the same in Australia.
If we think that God is indifferent to the chasm between the ethical state of the church and biblical values and will bless the church in Australia we are “chasing after wind” (Eccl 1:14). It is important that we consider the very nature of the body of Christ if we are to escape this situation.
The Church is the Sanctuary
Both the Greek Old Testament and the New Testament use a variety of terms when discussing the temple. Typically, when the entire complex of buildings and surrounds are being referred to the main word used is hieros (Matt 4:5; Mark 13:1; Luke 2:27; John 2:14; Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 9:13 etc.). However, when the biblical authors wish to refer to the church as “temple” they use a word (naos) that means the innermost shrine of the temple, the “holy of holies” (1 Cor 3:16; 2 Cor 6:19; Eph 2:21; Rev 3:12). The significance of this distinction is that the church is equivalent to the one place in the temple where God was believed to dwell. Importantly, there were no divisions within the holiest place.
According to this typology, there are no degrees of holiness in the church and no spiritual compartmentalization is possible. The church as a spiritual building is one open – spaced structure. This pattern is opposite to the graded approach to God – Gentiles, Jewish women, Jewish men, Levitical priests, Aaronic priesthood – found in Old Testament times. The reason for the difference is found in the work of Jesus.
When Jesus refers to his own body as a temple, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” (John 2:19), he uses naos because he is the site of the indwelling of the fullness of God (John 1:14, 16; Col 1:19; 2:9). His prophetic words reach a climax at the point of his death, “Then Jesus cried again with a loud voice and breathed his last. At that moment the curtain of the temple (naos) was torn in two, from top to bottom.” (Matt 27:50- 51).
The curtain separated the “holy of holies” from the rest of the temple. Under the old covenant only the High Priest could enter into the innermost shrine and only on the Day of Atonement with blood to cover the sins of all the people (Lev 16:11 – 19). The tearing of the curtain therefore symbolised that the old distance between the common people and God was now taken away.
Hebrews emphasises that in contrast to the old dispensation all Christians at all times have equal access to the most intimate presence of God because of the death of Jesus, “We have this hope, a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters the inner shrine behind the curtain, where Jesus, a forerunner on our behalf, has entered, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek….Therefore, my friends,since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh),” (6:19- 20; 10:19- 20)
Since the blood of Christ now “cleanses us from all sin” (1 John 1:7; Heb 9:14; 10:22), there is absolutely no reason why any believer in Jesus should not appropriate the most intimate presence of God. Since we are both the holy of holies itself (1 Cor 3:16; 2 Cor 6:19; Eph 2:21), and can freely enter into the innermost shrine (Hebrews 6:19- 20; 10:19- 20), shame and guilt no longer compartmentalise the people of God into those closer and further away from the divine glory.
Tradition has it that there were no lamps in the holy of holies but it was continually illuminated by brilliance of the shekinah glory of God (Ex. 25:22; Lev. 16:2; 2 Sam. 6:2; 2 Kings 19:14, 15; Ps. 80:1; Isa. 37:16; Ezek. 9:3; 10:18; Heb. 9:5). The New Testament picks up this theme of holy light when it says, “God is light and in him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). Moreover, Christians themselves are called “light”, “For once you were darkness, but now in the Lord you are light. Live as children of light…” (Eph 5:8). Since we as believers actually share in the light of God’s glory there can be no graded approach to God.
In contrast to these biblical pictures when we look at what is standard in the church today things are not as they should be. In various ways the modern church is a shame –based culture.
The Church and Shame
Many a congregation in this city has a pastor who is struggling in his marriage, but very few are aware of it until there is a breakdown in the relationship. Others are ashamed to talk about the spiritual state of their children, for fear of being treated as unfit for ministry. How about all those who leave the ministry, often due to sexual sin or conflict, and no one outside the church hierarchy is ever informed of the real reason – it is “burn out”, “retirement” or some such thing. Then there are cases where sin is confessed to ministerial colleagues but kept from the congregation.
Hosts of couples wander into the church building Sunday by Sunday as if everything was ok, but at home things are a disaster. Pornography is a hidden plague with many men. Other believers are embarrassed about their lack of financial clout and are careful what they wear to worship lest they feel embarrassed. There are thousands of Christians who have had affairs, abortions, homosexual liaisons and many other shameful incidents since their conversion, and no- one would have any idea that they were less than “perfect”. In terms of power in the church people soon learn that anyone who dares to disagree with the vision of the senior pastor is made to feel like there is something wrong with them.
A Christian friend with a criminal background said he had noticed that whenever an ex –addict gave their testimony they freely talked about their substance abuse and other crimes, but seemed to omit reference to sexual sin. Yet in his opinion it was the promiscuity that was most damaging to his life (1 Cor 6:18).
This amounts to a Christian culture that controls people through their fear of being “outed” or exposed; this makes it a shame based culture. Why is it like this?
Leadership Teaching Shame
As far as we can tell, the past history of Christians was public knowledge in the church. We have ex Pharisees like Paul (Phil 3:5), tax collectors like Matthew (Matt 9:9 -13), terrorists like Simon (Matt 10:4), prostitutes like the woman who wept at Jesus feet (Luke 7:37), the demon possessed such as Mary Magdalene (Luke 8:2) and so on. Paul unhesitatingly reminds the Corinthians of their past, “Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites,thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers…And this is what some of you used to be.”, but he goes on to emphasise, “But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” (1 Cor 6:9- 11). But what of the post conversion struggles of the people of God?
We have a clear record of the apostles arguments over who among them is the greatest (Mark 9:34), of Judas’ betrayal of Jesus, and of the rest of the apostles deserting Christ (Mark 14:27). Special emphasis is laid upon the failure of Peter as the leader of the apostolic band to bear witness to Christ (Mark 14:66 -72). Into the rest of the New Testament we have the stand up controversy between Paul and Barnabas (Acts 15:39) and Paul’s public confrontation of Peter (Gal 2:11). Apostles seemed to have sufficient strength of conviction to name trouble makers and backsliders in the church (e.g. 1 Tim 1:20; 2 Tim 2:17; 4:10; 3 John 9).
This openness about naming sinful behaviour was a disciplinary habit that continued in the early church for several hundred years. It was not a manipulative “name and shame” device but a confident expression of the power of the gospel to deliver from all shame and to present the repentant as “blameless” and so shameless before God (1 Cor 1:8; Eph 1:4; 5:27 Phil 1:10; 2:15; 1 Thess 5:23; Rev 14:5).
Compare this with the typical pattern of leadership today. As in shame – based families the rule of “no talk” often prevails. You cannot talk about what is really felt because it would bring past shame into the open. You cannot discuss church conflicts and the divisions they caused because you might discover you were wrong and that would add to your shame.
Often, a code is used. For example, when someone is “sacked” we say that they have been “released” from their ministry position or are “moving on” to another field of ministry. Decisions that are directives are presented as agreements. What is really going on behind the closed door of eldership no-one knows, unless of course they are part of the inner circle of “mature believers”. Christians are taught they don’t have “problems” but challenges; failure is the great taboo.
The fruit of this sort of leadership is immaturity in the church. It nurtures a culture where shameful and dark things are kept hidden (as if God did not see it all) so that people do not grow inwardly. The conscience of the average believer, who is repeatedly told that the gospel is powerful, is kept infantile by the actual failure of the oversight of the church to enact the gospel in a biblical manner. No wonder we lack the freedom of confession of sin for healing that seems so integral to the New Testament church (James 5:14- 16; 1 John 1: 5- 10).
Overcoming the Culture of Shame
“See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame” (Romans 9:33;1 Peter 2:6, NIV). Jesus is not ashamed to call us his brothers (Heb 2:11) and God is not ashamed to be our God (Heb 10:16).
Let me close with a profound story I heard this week. A teacher said to a pupil, “How do you know that God loves you?” The reply came, “I know that my name is safe in his mouth.” In other words, God in Christ never plays the blame and shame game, he never uses your reputation, dignity or history of failure as a weapon against you. There is no accusation or manipulation using shame in the Godhead. God has never tried to get you tithing, reading the Bible, evangelizing, praying etc. through the use of feelings of personal inadequacy or deficiency. You do not have to be prosperous, successful, spiritual or any other thing. Since Jesus “endured the cross, scorning its shame” (Hebrews 12:2) the shame culture no longer has any power over you. It is the power of this gospel that can bridge the gulf between the exhortations of the New Testament concerning Christian behaviour and the sorry state we find ourselves in.