The Elephant in the Church

No progress until we face it

I tend to be a bit of an indoor-elephant-pointer-outer, so I’m well aware of how this system works: the elephant is in the room because people don’t want to talk about it, but the first step in getting the elephant out of the room is to talk about it.

Therefore, the biggest roadblocks to creating elephant-free rooms are those who insist the elephant not be mentioned.

Therefore, the troublemaker is not the one who points out the elephant, but the one who insists the elephant not be pointed out. Because an elephant in a room is a problem, and wisdom dictates that we handle our problems.

So, let’s talk about an elephant that exists in many rooms—namely in church auditoriums:

God designed the church to be led by men, but in many cases—perhaps most—it is led by women.

No, you won’t find women’s pictures on the “Elders” or “Ministers” page on the website. Rather, it’s a behind-the scenes power that they wield.

Sometimes it happens when everybody knows a certain elder’s wife is the driving force behind major decisions. No, she might not sit in on the meetings. But it’s fairly obvious that she bends his ear on his way into the meeting or leans on him to change decisions she doesn’t like after the meeting.

Other times it happens when the old ladies caucus must always be appeased lest they start stirring up strife to get their way. The elders know better than to hire a new preacher without making sure those women approve of their choice. The preacher, if he wants to stick around a while, must immediately get into their good graces.

Still other times it may be when young moms demand that every decision be made with their schedules and parenting philosophies in mind, or any other preferences they wish to wield.

And, all of this is facilitated by men who don’t lead at home. Broken leadership models at home spill over into everything else, including the church.

Similarly to what I said in the recent article on men listening to their wives, any wise eldership or leadership group would do well to have a sense of what the women of the congregation are thinking. But, in the exact same way, they still have to make a final decision based first and foremost on what is right rather than on any person or group’s preferences.

In other words, when the situation demands it, they have to be able to tell the women “no.”

That sounds simple enough, but if you’ve been in such a church situation, you know how much of an uphill battle that can be. But, it’s what has to be done. There are numerous reasons why, including:

It’s what Scripture demands

Despite having plenty of women disciples, Jesus chose 12 male apostles. Despite knowing numerous good Christian women, Paul told Timothy and Titus to put in elders—a male noun, but also named explicitly as men (1 Timothy 3:1, Titus 1:6). God also made men the heads of their families (Ephesians 5:22ff, 1 Peter 3:1ff).

Male leadership is God’s design. Anything that subverts it, whether explicitly or implicitly, is disobedience, and disobedience is never blessed.

So, though there are multiple practical reasons why it should be this way, “because God said so” is more than enough of a reason. Still, those practical explanations help us see God’s wisdom at work.

Men are less likely to be deceived by weaponized empathy

One of the characteristics God gave to women was an enhanced care for those around them. One of the characteristics God gave men was the ability to be disagreeable. Feminine empathy that isn’t counterbalanced by male disagreeableness leads to a lot of wolves being brought in because they look really cold and hungry.

For this reason, weaponized empathy is the greatest driver of false truths in the church today. Opposing someone is cast as being mean-spirited, regardless of how lovingly it’s done.

That’s why you need men defending the flock (Acts 20:29). But if the men are nominally in charge yet still subject to the soft pressure of the women, the church will not have the strength to oppose bad ideas.

Women are not wired for direct leadership

If two people waltz, both can’t lead. If a husband and wife both try to lead, the family will lack direction. If the men and the women lead the church, the same problems arise.

That being the case, women are wired for indirect leadership. In other words, they don’t lead, but they can influence those who do. They suggest, they nudge. This is not a flaw, it’s a design element, and it works great—if they assume an indirect role.

Being submissive but engaged and invested is the perfect place for them to nudge and request and suggest things of the leadership. But if they will not submit to the men’s final decision, indirect leadership is now the default system.

Passive aggression comes to rule the day, and passive aggression is asymmetric warfare. It is nearly impossible to oppose without significant social cost, because when you try to confront the aggression, they retreat behind the passivity. Now all everyone around sees is an attack on a passive person.

Those who lead must do so right out front. That’s why we have elders who have a job title, so everyone knows who’s calling the shots and can see how they’re doing it. And, that offers another built-in feature: accountability.

The women won’t be the ones giving an account

The buck has to stop with someone, and the Scriptures say it will be those who have been assigned to keep watch over our souls (Hebrews 13:17).

But because women’s leadership is not direct, they can’t be held accountable for their decisions. For example, let’s say a group of women pressure the elders to hire a preacher who holds questionable doctrines. Let’s say he comes in, teaches error, and splits the church.

When it’s time to point fingers, who gets the blame? Ultimately, the elders. So, though they can solicit input, the final decision should be theirs.

The funny thing is, too often we’re worried about men who will rule through fear. And, that’s a fair concern. It certainly can and does happen.

But women’s leadership can be done just as much through fear—only a different kind of fear. If a man is afraid of the misery his wife will bring on him if he opposes her (Proverbs 21:9), she’s ruling him through fear. If a leadership group is afraid of what some women might do if the men make a decision the women didn’t want, the women are ruling by fear.

If we’re against fear-based leadership, we need to be against all fear-based leadership. Especially from those who have not been assigned to lead. And between the two ditches of masculine fear-based leadership and feminine fear-based leadership, this is by far the more common of the two.

The question this all comes down to

Whose church is it?

It’s Christ’s church, because He paid for it with His blood (Acts 20:28). That makes Him the head (Ephesians 5:23). As the head, He gets to delegate His own authority, and He delegated it directly to those qualified men who are named as shepherds of it (Titus 1:5).

It’s no coincidence that that phrase, “[Christ] purchased with His own blood,” is found in an exhortation to elders. It shows a direct chain of command, one that cannot be compromised without disastrous results.

Any system that does not follow His prescription is a subversion of Christ’s authority. If, say, the rogue elder’s wife is pulling all the strings in a church, then Jesus isn’t.

Wherever this elephant exists in the church auditorium, it’s time for men to stand up, point it out, lovingly lead a better way forward, and be prepared to get called every name in the book for their troubles.

No, it’s not easy, but it’s the right thing to do. It’s not our job to get results, it’s our job to be faithful to Christ’s processes and let Him handle the results.

---

Notes

A brief note about subscriptions…

You may have noticed that, other than book giveaways, everything on this site is now FREE!

However, locking articles does drive more premium subscriptions, and the added income from those has been a tremendous boost to give my family a little more financial breathing room. In other words, giving everything away free does make it tougher to gain paying subscribers.

So, I want to thank all those who are premium subscribers for your invaluable support. And I want to encourage non-premium subscribers to consider upgrading. Having a steady growth of premium subscribers without using the paywall is a huge boost and helps me keep everything available free.

Thanks for subscribing, and for your consideration!