All too often, those who would cause division and dissent can neither substantiate their criticism nor, sometimes, even articulate what their actual criticism is. Yet many churches routinely expect their leaders to take a “humble” stance (for which read, conciliatory and submissive) to accusations that are both unjust and untrue.

A few weeks back, in our weekly podcast, we had a discussion about how to respond to false criticism. That is, when people are saying things about you that are essentially untrue, what is the best way to address it? You can hear the discussion here, the pertinent bit starts at around 19:30.

In that podcast, it was put to me that we should always – regardless of what the criticism or accusation we have received is – look for the 10 or 20 per cent that is true and humbly respond to it. You can listen to the segment to hear some of why I vociferously disagreed with that position.

It is my view that if you are criticised and, as part of that criticism, you have done something wrong, then yes, you should apologise for that and seek to change. It is certainly the case that if the criticism or accusation is almost entirely accurate, swift acknowledgement of the truth and a clear desire to change are vital. Some of the time, criticism will not land square on, but the essential point will be true. We could preoccupy ourselves pointing out the minor matters of fact that are incorrect, but if the substance of the criticism is true, again we should simply acknowledge it and (where necessary) repent. That is entirely right and proper.

But in cases where the criticism is simply untrue, it is not the case that you should be looking for the 10 or 20 per cent to apologise for. If there is no basis in fact for the criticism, it may have the appearance of humility to apologise for it, but it strikes me as an entirely dishonest response. We are allowing what is false not only to go unquestioned but, worse, to be affirmed.

Abuse, and cultures of abuse, certainly exist in the church. As much as leaders can abuse their members, it is equally the case that sometimes congregations abuse, and create abuses systems that inevitably lead to the abuse of, their leaders. In my experience, when pastors are abused by their congregations, at some point this tactic of seeking apologies for false accusations in a bid to either get the mud to stick or to follow up, if an acknowledgement is not forthcoming, to paint the leader as lacking humility and thus disqualified. When we buy into a culture that demands apologies for what is ultimately untrue, we are effectively propping up this kind of abuse. When we grant them as church leaders, we are lending credibility to what is ultimately damaging.

Read More