Not 'Shun the bullies.'
Shun the bullied:
"Anyone who uses the words 'they are bullying me, back off from them.
It is wordly, sensual, it is not from the Spirit.
God's people don't use that language because they understand the concept of what that means.
If someone uses it to me, I know that it is the accuser talking. I refuse to listen to them...
The word bully has a drive to it.
If you hear it, stop it. Have nothing to do with that person.
Have nothing to do with anyone who says they are being bullied.
Walk away."
Words spoken by a Pastor as advice to his flock.
The God of both the Old and New Testament, by contrast, is presented as a God who rescues the downtrodden, who defends the cause of the oppressed.
Jeremiah 22:3
This is what the Lord says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.
Psalm 103:6
The Lord works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed.
Jeremiah 22:3
This is what the Lord says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.
Psalm 103:6
The Lord works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed.
He is on the side of the underdog, the downtrodden. The bullied.
So why would a Pastor preach a message exhorting in the strongest possible terms to avoid any who say they are bullied? Why preach a message that is so contrary to Scripture?
The most reasonable explanation is that a claim of being bullied entails an allegation that someone is a bully. And no allegations of any kind are permitted, especially if raised against the leader.
Such a policy, in the case of an allegation which happens to be true, suggests strongly that there must be an interest in protecting the bully. There is no accommodation to verify, nor to alleviate any suffering, so whatever the truth, it is the assumption that the bullied person must be indulging in slander which carries the day. This is, of course, expected policy in abusive cultures.
Such a policy, in the case of an allegation which happens to be true, suggests strongly that there must be an interest in protecting the bully. There is no accommodation to verify, nor to alleviate any suffering, so whatever the truth, it is the assumption that the bullied person must be indulging in slander which carries the day. This is, of course, expected policy in abusive cultures.
To instruct a congregation to avoid a person who says he feels bullied is, potentially, to protect an abuser while silencing and ostracizing the victim. Allegations really ought to be investigated!
If, as a teacher, I refused to listen to a pupil complaining of playground bullying, scolding him for making accusations against another pupil and failing to investigate, I would be falling short in my duty of care to a child, failing to safeguard, violating the 'anti-bullying' policy, incurring the understandable wrath of parents and the Head Teacher and possibly contributing to a failed Ofsted inspection, never mind my actions being morally repellent.
One can only assume that a leader who preaches such a message is afraid that someone might blow the whistle on him. And that such a leader has a vested interested in making the member 'under' him continue to suffer in silence, alone, rather than have his own actions placed under scrutiny.
It is a matter of wonder how appallingly the 'anti-criticism' message can be twisted, in a cult-like community, into a sickening policy which shames, silences and perpetuates suffering in the victim, while allowing the bully to continue his (often hidden) abuse, unquestioned and unabated.
No comments:
Post a Comment