Nothing will zap your marriage, ministry, or leadership greater than moral failure. Several times a week I receive devastating emails and phone calls from people suffering the grave fallout from some type of scandal. Moral failure leaves behind a certain residue that is just really hard for most folk to overcome and should be avoided like the plague.
Many people see me as an example of how to be a husband, parent, and leader with integrity and I am thankful for this, but it’s not easy and it takes a lot of effort on my part and help from other people. In fact, I take pretty drastic measures to avoid moral failure. I’d advise you to do the same thing.
I’m not bragging. Heck – some of you may even think that what I am about to say is weird, but my wife is the only woman I have ever had sex with. We’ve been together since I was 16 (I’m 29 now) and I have been able to avoid moral failure in my marriage by going the extra mile to do what many others might find ridiculous. Two of my favorite pastors (and bloggers) – Perry Noble & Craig Groeschel -recently shared the measures they take to avoid moral failure and I want to share mine as well.
Here is what Craig said he does.
Here is what Perry said he does.
Here are a four things that I do:
- My wife (and other people) has access to every cell phone, laptop, bank account, email account, voicemail, social network, text message, etc. that I have or use. No one has the time (or desire) to police these accounts word for word, but they are monitored.
- I go to great lengths to never be alone with another woman and have done this for the past 10+ years. It’s not that I think women are falling all over me (they aren’t), but I don’t even want the appearance or possibility of failure to be out there. Some people actually see this as some type of admission of weakness on my part. Maybe so, but I don’t care. The proof that it works is my marriage.
- I have other people in authority that I answer to and moral covenants that I have signed off on with consequences for moral failure. It appears that being a lone ranger is a major cause of moral failure for the majority of people.
- I surround myself with great examples of what it means to have integrity in life and marriage. Simply seeing and being around these folk keeps me encouraged. It’s much easier to live a certain lifestyle in a community of people doing the same thing.
Do you have any strategies or measures that you take? I’d love to hear them!
{ 97 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
I was friends with several women in college that once they got married completely cut me off. Basically no contact whatsoever. That was not a healthy option.
Billy why is this more a sin for the woman that is in need than for you? What I and I think many of the women are saying is not that you need to sin and violate your conscious, but that you need to recognize the reality of how your policy will affect other people. It will affect others. That may be ok, and in your case you seem to have weighed the options and think that the potential offense is worth it. What I am saying is that if you do believe the potential offense is worth it, what are you doing to try to minimize that offense. I think referring people to an outside counselor is fine, but there is a matter of the heart toward women that is important. Are women just as valued in your congregation as men? Are there valid ways for criticism to reach leadership that is healthy and can lead to a more healthy congregation in the long term? These are the real questions for me. The specific policy is less important because it will be different for different situations.
What should not happen is to blame the victim and say any sin against them is their fault. That is true of both a pastor that has a predator act against them, a predator pastor that acts against someone in their church and a person that was not served by the church because of a policy that prevented it.
I was involved in a church where there was an affair between two deacons. There was clearly an inappropriate power issue in the response. The male (about 20 years older and by far the largest giver to the church) acknowledge the sin to the pastor (after being confronted) but refused to allow the pastor to bring it to light or tell the wife. The female (also the worship leader) wanted to confess to an affair (not bring his name up) publicly (she had confessed to her husband) but was prevented by the pastor. She asked for permission to repent publicly for six years and was rejected. It was only after she was pushed out of the church and questions were asked that the male told his wife and the church. It was handled very badly and the church about eight years later has still not recovered.
This is not primarily about women refusing to protect their pastor, this is about the church protecting and encouraging its members.
Who said that sin against a victim is there fault? I said by adopting an attitude of "they don't care about me because He refuses to meet with me in private…" is making themselves the victim.
It's not like I'm pulling anyone into the conversation. It's a fellow staff member or my wife. If they have issue with the person I bring in then we will get someone else.
It's by no means a closed door to women policy. And if they feel un-served by the policy than they are the type of person that will find fault with anything, and I am happy to let them find fault/what they are looking for in a different ministry.
I don't mean to come off as rude or uncaring but the move of God is bigger than one person. When you take offense at something that is put in place to protect that move of God than you are missing the bigger picture. What God is doing in the ministry is more important than your problem. My Marriage and family is more important than your problem. Your problem is still important and we/I want to serve you but not at the potential expense of the ministry or my wife and family. If you see it differently than there is somewhere else for you to be!
The church I am a part of was nearly destroyed by a pastor that allowed himself to be alone with a women who was hurting… ONE THING led to ANOTHER and they committed adultery. divorced there spouses and caused a lot of people to doubt what God was/IS doing here in this church.
Now I don't know if safe guards would have worked but it would have been a lot harder to commit adultery with a third party in the room.
I am sorry if I am not communicating well. Let me start with the last part. I am well aware as are pretty much everyone on this blog that adultery will bring down a church and no one is in support of adultery. I am speaking from a place of having lived through church crap as well.
I think that it is ok for your wife to be involved in counseling sessions. I think that having an open door policy with both men and women is fine. What you are assuming is that having this rule in place will stop sin. What I am assuming is that having this rule in place will not stop sin. My assumption is that some (but not all) women will see this policy as alienating. And in your case it seems like you are still making an effort. Other women posting here and several that I know are saying that this policy as acted out in their church means that they cannot meet with their pastor at all, whether it be for counseling or ministry discussion.
My point is simple. If this policy, as acted out in a local context, means that women do become second class in the church (because that is how they feel, because they loose access to leadership, because private meetings among men happen, but they can't participate in private meetings, because women are held at arms length for feel of what others will thing) then we are not really living out our calling to be the whole church.
I do not want to attack you or your ministry. I don't know you, you probably have a wonderful ministry. I just want to help Shaun think about the ramifications of his decisions.
I understand what you are saying Adam. But what I'm saying is if a women feels they loose access to me because I won't meet with them one on one that is silly. They NEED to understand the reason behind and if they don't agree with it/don't understand it than I can't help that. I fail to see how that makes them second class. It certainly doesn't make them second class in my opinion it simply acknowledges that there is a capacity to sin in a one on one context that is far greater then if we meet with another person. The idea that I shouldn't meet with a man 1 on 1 to make it fair or because I could sin there is silly. I'm not attracted to men so temptation is not an issue there. That's not to say I'm tempted every time I'm with a women but it is saying that the risk is there so I will do everything I can to avoid it.
Just because some churches refuse to listen to Women doesn't mean these policies are the issue. I am happy to meet with and listen to women just not alone.
I don't understand why people can't see that safeguarding yourself is needed. We all wear sea tbelts and buy cars with air bags and high crash ratings. That doesn't mean all other drivers are second class. Nor is it a commentary on there driving. It is simply a measure of protection just in case something does.
I think we are just coming at this in different ways. I don't really disagree with you that strongly. You are concerned about your own ministry because that is where you experience is. I am concerned with the other because that is where my experience is. In the end you are probably right, inappropriate use of these policies identifies something else that is wrong with the church, not the policy itself.
Billy,
I am greatly discouraged at a faith in Christ that has to use external safeguards to keep people from sinning. Didn't Paul in Colossians say that regulations had an appearance of wisdom, but lacked any value in restraining indulgence? It's about the heart! And if our faith isn't capable of turning us into mature men and women of God who know how to draw lines in our hearts of purity, what use is it? We might as well go ahead stop fooling ourselves with our carefully protected piety, because if we're that much on the verge of destroying our churches and families every moment, we need help that no formula of "safety" is going to give us…
You talk about the need to guard yourself and your pastor. I guess I'm wondering where you draw the line? What I mean is, should I wear only clothing that does not show my female shape, such as the Amish do? Perhaps I am not guarding my brothers by wearing regular western attire. Should I cover my hair, maybe even my face? What will it take for me to guard my brothers?
(continued…)
I have 4 drAAAstic things I do as well.
1. I gouge out an eye
2. I chop off a hand
3. I swear an oath by heavem the earth, Jerusalem, and my head
4. I post a plaque on my door that says "Do not handle; Do not taste; Do not touch."
Then after I've amazed everyone with my drAstic approach to this drAstic problem, I'm considering adding one final drAstic measure–that is, I'll call "moral failure" by a drastic new name: ADULTERY. Then perhaps I will toy with the idea of just…not doing it.
If it has pleased the father to give me eternal life, and to give to us the Kingdom, perhaps we should just begin by being content and not making such a big deal of ourselves. Why do big-shots fall? Because they think they deserve one of everything. All of theirs and one of mine.
Supersize someone else. Make mine a small.
This type of thinking is the same thinking that causes certain religious groups to not have certain color stoves in their homes. They want to guard each other from envy, and figure that if there is something unnecessarily colorful, like new stove, that it could provoke another member of the community to envy. They want to protect each other. And they do not wear buttons on their clothing for the same reason: someone 200 years ago when buttons were first introduced expressed concern that buttons on some women's dresses were provoking other women to envy them. So they banned buttons.
So how far do I go to protect my brothers, before you can say that I'm not living for "me" anymore? How many rules will it take to be safe? After a while, we won't really need the Holy Spirit or a Savior, because we've figured out how to keep ourselves pure without needing His power over sin. We just never allow ourselves to be in any position where any sin could possibly happen, and we will seem all white and shiny on the outside, where it counts, and our ministries will flourish. And Jesus will smile.
Forgive me if I sound just a little bit incredulous at your reply.
Heather, you are going to far extremes to make a point. To do so is comparing apples and oranges.
Do I think a women should dress modestly? Yes. Does she need to cover her head, and face, and where a big frumpy amish dress? No. Does a women need to be careful about "showing her female shape?" Yes! I don't blame women for being attractive… That's silly. But to not acknowledge what it has the capacity to do in a mans heart and mind is foolish of a women. You don't dress in tight close cause they are comfortable. The bible is clear that we should not be a stumbling block. It is also clear that we aren't "living for "me" anymore."
Faith alone doesn't keep us from sinning. It's not Pious to acknowledge that I have a capacity to sin at any moment. Does that mean I'm on the verge of sinning all the time? Yes and no…. I have a sin nature. Does that make me unable to lead people? No. I think you have a super human view of what church leaders look like. and with that kind of perspective you will be disappointed every time.
Wow. It's been a while since I visited this thread, and I am truly shocked to read your comments. You keep talking about women who "can't see" the need behind your rules (and such a woman can take a hike, in your opinion). But you can't see that if/when you invite men into your office to discuss say, the future direction of the church, or to hear their view of ministry, or to instruct them, but you close the door to women in the same circumstance because of a rule that is about protecting you, you have demoted them and let them know in the clearest way that as far as you are concerned, they are unworthy of the same ministry. Like it or not, you are supposed to be the pastor of the whole church. I am not suggesting that you put yourself in situations that are dangerous or easily misunderstood. I AM saying that you have the responsibility to consider what you DO as carefully as what you SAY with regard to ministry to your whole congregation. Others here have testified that they have felt demoted by such policies. Can you not hear? What an indictment against pastors if we are unwilling to change what we do if it has unintended consequences; what a further indictment if the solution to not wanting to hear such things is "go ruin some other ministry."
Perhaps it is school district or county related. But I have worked at both public and private schools, and there is even training done by DHR yearly on how to relate to the children for both their protection and yours. Unfortunately it is not always a matter of adults taking advantage of the children, sometimes children have submitted stories that are false or misleading regarding their relationships to teachers and staff. They training even goes so far as to teach teachers and staff how to hug children in a way that can not be considered inappropriate touch. Perhaps the experience is not the same with your wife, however I would not say that such policies don't exist.
Bravo Shaun!
Very interesting discussion. We are free in Christ and if you find these steps helpful then you should pursue them. Part of pursuing them is to explain to people why you take these steps which is also appropriate. From that you of course also take the commentary and perspectives of those who disagree or are upset by them, as was seen in this discussion. Moral failure of a sexual nature is a problem and good steps can help.
Thoughtful Christians have long noted, however, that sin is not so easily dealt with through external constraints, in fact sometimes the way those remedies are pursued in fact tempt us in other ways.
Does the heightened profile of safeguards in this one area create an implicit hierarchy of sin? You take elaborate steps to safeguard from sexual sin, but what about gossip or gluttony?
Some have noted that the contrast of the Sermon on the Mount, for example, was not between the irreligious (younger brothers of Luke 15) and the religious, but rather between the religious (older brothers of Luke 15) and Christ followers. The point of the lesson was not so much to drive followers into tithing salt and pepper, but into realizing the insufficiencies of their resources in beating this enemy and therefore driving them to rely on God's grace. Recipients of God's revelation have had a peculiar history with that revelation. Some thought that devotion to God should best be expressed by hedging that law in order to be extra sure they didn't break it. Jesus didn't follow them into the tradition of the elders (which in fact Jesus contrasted and critiqued in the Sermon on the Mount). Galatian believers undoubtedly imagined that if believing was good, then being very circumspect about the Old Covenant would be better. Paul disagreed.
I guess I don't have a problem with the individual choices we make, and measures we choose as disciples to honor God and shun sin. That's certainly all good. But how do we talk about it? Faith in measures and standards that develop into a contemporary evangelical "tradition of the elders" may find a way of becoming a kind of sin that threatens our relationship with Christ at a deeper level than even an adulterous affair.
my two cents. pvk
Joan,
You read my mind exactly. The above discussion is a big part of the reason I have not attended formal church in several years. I have a ministry background and have been actively involved in church my whole life (44 years) until recently primarily because of the legalism that did anything but nurture a close relationship with God. I found out about the Courageous Church and began reading some of the blogs a few months ago. I was drawn to the church because I have typically been involved with inner-city churches that were considered out of the box, served the least of these, positioned themselves as soldiers in the Lord's army, etc. Just as I have to take a second look at a man I am attracted to (because I often am attracted to relationships that feed my broken flesh), I had to really take a second look at whether or not I wanted to get involved in another "intense" church because it could end up feeding my legalism, need for rules, pattern of having to perform and be perfect, etc. (Not to mention I had a breakdown after going through a trauma that involved church leadership) I believe it was God just telling me to proceed with caution.
I believe that churches/denominations often cater to the areas of our flesh that we rely on or our neurotic issues (i.e. Presbyterian doctrines-lend themselves to those of us who rely on our intellect, Charismatic churches-lend themselves to those who rely more on emotions, etc.). Not knocking any because I have been part of both and learned a lot I do think that those of use who have issues with having to perform to be loved, shame, etc. are often drawn to churches where there are lots of rules, control (often coming under the cloak of "we need a covering.") I thought it was Jesus who covers us, you know like the mother covers her baby chicks.
I
I know I am way off the primary issue here, but what I am trying to get at is that Joan is dead on. I also hear so much fear. I actually starting feeling panicky as I read through these blogs. Is our trust in Him, His grace, love and power or in our rules and ability to be perfect? I realized in reading this blog that the main reason I do not want to go back to organized church is because we always make it so darn complicated. I am committed to going back to Sunday School 1 on 1-believing that God loves me and that His grace is sufficient. So much of what we do is cultural Christianity and very far from the person of Christ. Just as you said, Jesus wasn't scared to be seen with a prostitute. Perfect love cast out fear. Are we courageous enough to believe this?
I am not naive; believe me I have been through more of my share of struggles and am currently in the midst of fighting for my life. I just believe that God has called us to something much higher than this. Are we more afraid of a scandel than we are of missing the real deal?
Thanks for providing this opportunity for me to process and vent.
redeemedM,
I think some are more afraid of loosing their family, loosing their ministry, loosing their reputation, etc. Yep, I too have been down the path, and have the battle scars. Risk management is always a concern, and to not be aware of what one is potentially walking into is foolhardy. However, depending upon ones gifts, it is either a risk one must avoid, or one must walk head on into. I think you see it that Christ calls us to sacrifice, and it may mean we could loose everything. Others without the gifts, see to do so would be borderline irresponsible, and barriers are a must.
I know pastors who have been on both sides of this, and yes, some innocent men of God lost everything… but they would do it again if God asked. How many would risk their lives to share the Gospel in unfriendly lands? Not all are called nor gifted in that arena. Some are called locally, and to protect their ministry, their friends, their family. Others are called to potentially give it all, yet each is in service to Christ as they are able. I do concede some of this could be the influence of cultural Christianity, but being the idealist I am, I’d like to think its more an issue of gifting.
By the same token, for those with the barrier approach, consider what happens when a so called troll comes in and makes accusations of homosexual advances, female focused safeguards will make no difference at that point. Is the solution to pull clergy out of all 1:1 roles, and leave counseling to the secular world due to this risk? Granted, its an extreme, but it is part of being wise as serpants to consider.
That being said, I go back to my gift comments from earlier. Not everyone is gifted for counseling, nor 1:1 counseling, nor other than same gender 1:1 couseling for that matter. Not every one has the same faith, same scriptural interpretation, same risk aversion, or even same culture, same geography etc. With the bit of background which was provided, the safeguards proposed make sense for Sean. Be that as it may, if said safeguards are implemented, it is up to Sean and his ministry team to come up with solutions to ensure the entire congregation is served. Fortunately they are a larger org, they will find a way to make this happen. Its a whole different ballgame for the 50-100 person church with a single pastor.
My apologies, egads, I am an idiot, sorry to mispell your name….
I don't know what to do or how to even begin the process of change. I've been on my knees praying the entire week. I just finished reading the blog drastic measures to avoid moral failure and I can honestly say I am running at full speed into a pit of total spiritual and moral decay. The company I have been working for is in shambles and has yet to pay me for 3 months of work, my roommate's house is getting foreclosed, and another roommate is in the process of killing himself with cocaine and heroin. I would like to think I could be the shining light that is a beacon of hope to these two, but instead I find myself sinking into a mind set of desperation. I have sent over 2,000 resumes out and I was blessed with a job, pt that pays 7 dollars an hour. I have move from this situation because it is tearing my soul to pieces. And of course the first thing my mind runs to is selling drugs. I can barely find a job to support myself, but the dealers believe in me enough to give me a kilo to sell. Do I live comfortably by destroying the lives of men, women, and families by feeding addictions? Or do I reach out and make myself transparent and believe my God is greater than all the forces that wish to see me submit to a life of evil and death? My Father in Heaven will not allow me to fall when I reach out for him and I don't know how I am going to get out of this, but I know I need help from people who's hearts belong to the King of Kings. I need help, I need help now and I am hoping and praying it will begin with this post.
Paul
This reminds me of something that happened years ago when I first became a "participating" member of a church. We were shopping for a new pastor and they had one of those meet and greet with a time for questions. One thing that I had really admired about the pastor who had left was the way he had an open door policy two days a week – the other days were for meetings, appts, prayer, preparing sermons. If you had something you wanted to discuss with him or ask for advise you could drop in on him. He asked if it was going to be longer than 30 mins that you made an appt. So – I asked this pastor what his practice was as far as open door, appts etc. He immediately went into some long diatribe about how he would never meet with a woman alone blah blah blah. I didn't really get my question answered and I felt like I was being treated as if I had made a sexual advance. It was very embarrassing and demoralizing to me. I think a better solution would be to NOT announce that you are not meeting with women alone and if you feel it is necessary you could take some other precautions – meet in a public place like a coffee shop or have a place set up in the lobby of the church where you will be sitting in the open but no one is close enough to hear your conversation (there aren't that many people at church during the day) or glass doors so that people can see in your office when the door is closed. These are things that could be done and the woman would never know the difference and you could be protected. I personally think it seems unneccessary but if this is what you and your wife are comfortable with I think there is a more sensitive way to handle this so that you don't make women feel like they are being thought of as sexual objects and/or deviants. I wonder how you handle women on staff and how you think a woman who is a pastor should handle this situation – what about youth ministers – they are often men who are working with a lot of women volunteers – and then there is the music minister who is often a man working with a lot of women in the choir. It seems that this kind of restriction could really get in the way of doing God's work.
← Previous Comments
{ 6 trackbacks }