The ‘Arcissistic EcoSystem Part 1

Arcissist NOT Narcissist

I received a lot of feedback concerning my recent post on the difference between  what I now term”‘arcissists” and “narcissists”.

There were a few minor quibbles over why we have such a therapeutic culture, and a concern that the term “narcissist” is overused (hint: it is!). But the term “arcissist? Well it seems to fit the presenting issues I am talking about.

Okay, so the bloke (and it’s usually a bloke) might not be full blown narcissist, but he’s got a nasty habit of shredding and bullying anyone in his orbit who dares to challenge him. Or even if they don’t dare to challenge him.

The “arcissist” has a keen radar on everyone else’s issues, and very little on their own. They will pick and pick at your supposed sinfulness, but their rampant bad behaviour? They are – as I have heard it said – just being a little bit grumpy.

And there is a reason for that. In fact there are a number of reasons. The first reason of course is the lack of emotional intelligence in the arcissist themselves. Or perhaps – in theological terms – the presence of ongoing sin that hardens them and deceives them as to their true behaviour.

Arcissistic Ecosystems

But the arcissist is not the primary problem. “What?” I hear you say!, “How can that be?”  Simply this: Bullying leaders would not be able to do what they do unless they are at the centre of an ecosystem that at the very least permits their behaviour by turning a blind eye, or encourages it by being the gatekeeper against all criticism.

In other words the arcissist needs an ecosystem in order to first survive and then to thrive. The behaviour and the overlooking of it by others, is reinforcing.

In all ecosystems there are macro and micro participants that keep the system going. So naturally this is also the case in the arcissistic ecosystem. Let’s unpack the macro participants today and see what the wider issues are, and we will look at the micro participants in the next post.

Macro: The Culture “Out There”

Throughout history the primary problem in churches has been the infestation of “out there”  values “in here”. In other words the conformity to the world that infects the church. And it’s true of the arcissistic ecosystem as well.

When it comes to church ecosystems the wider culture has too often been allowed to set the tone. Now in a sense this has always been an issue for the church, and it presents in different ways at different times in history.

But in our current time, with its celebrity focus, and its oft-uncritical default commitment to impressiveness over integrity,  and its desire to “get stuff done”, this problem has ramped up. All sorts of arcisissts are not only excused, but feted by church ecosystems. And it is having consequences.

When we see the secular world  give oxygen to self-purposing, self-focussed and selfish behaviours, then it stands to reason that the water from that ecosystem will leak into the church pond. Especially without good Biblical critique.

We have seen this in the recent past with examples such as Mark Driscoll’s increasing volatility and platform rants. His church put up with it because it aped the wider culture’s commitment to the apex leader who “gets things done”. He also held all of the cultural, if not formal, power within the ecosystem, making it almost impossible, or at least very costly, to bring about change.

That we keep coming around to this arcissistic  issue tells us that, unlike 3 John, in which the apostle calls out the toxic leadership of “Diotrophes, who likes to be first”, indicates we have not figured out how to solve it.

With failing attendances, weak leaders, and unclear direction, the modern day Diotrophes is, by contrast, seen as a strong decisive leader (and certainly thinks of himself as one, and is adulated as such by his followers).

But the fruit is so often bitter. The result is so often that other people are hurt and damaged in the process. The ends do not justify the means. It’s hard to see how we get to such leadership from following Christ. But hey, here we are!

Macro: The Culture “In Here”

Of course, just as Jerusalem at its worst back in the days of its idolatrous kings was not such much destroyed from without, as much as hollowed out from within, so too the church ecosystem. Arcissism, where it exists in wider church structures such as denominations, is too often tolerated – and often rewarded – by a system whose aim is to ensure its own survival first and foremost.

Church denominations have to examine themselves, and realise that their own structures may not only be implicitly encouraging such types of leaders, but that they may then be going out of their way to protect such leaders when they behave poorly (again).

There’s a myth that the likes of Driscoll got away with it – and continues to do so – because there are insufficient structures and leadership dynamics to stop him. He’s the biggest player in the house, the house that he himself built.

But if that were the primary problem then we wouldn’t see older denominations struggling with this issue as well. We would assume that the strong structures and governance would flush this kind of behaviour out. Especially in systems that were big on promoting gospel purity.

Yet often we don’t see that. Unless there is a willingness for leaders within denominations to take a hit for the team, and refuse to make things go away or go quiet, then arcisissm will flourish even within systems that are policied and procedures to within an inch of their lives.

Non-Disclosure Agreements and You

I have just moved to Sydney from Perth. And so I have been watching with interest the recent Anglican Diocese of Sydney Synod discussions around the use of Non-Disclosure Agreements.

As an outsider I am a fan of many things within the diocese, not least of all the godly archbishop. And I have many friends here. Chances are we’ll end up at an Anglican church as our place of worship.

Yet for all of my support for a gospel-focussed diocese (having come from Western Australia where evangelicals have to keep their heads down), it would seem this constant battle over NDAs is a blight on the system.

At the very least it would appear to have become a one-size-fits-all that sweeps up issues that should never be shut down. Reading the reports that came out of Sydney, and speaking to people who work in the diocese, the risk seems that exceptions could become the rule. Happy to be told otherwise, but that is a concern.

Sensible people are batting for NDAs, often using the reasoning that it helps the victim move on into clear water. But those particular batters need to sit down – as I have – with some of those who have had to sign such documents and see the damage being done.

There are plenty of lawyerly types who can point out the jots and tittles, but if NDAs start to become a generalised default in an ecosystem rather than a sorrowful exception, then that’s a symptom of a deeper issue at play. Now that I’ve said that, I’ll let wiser heads than mine – ones inside the camp, continue to take up that cause in the diocese.

Update* I’ve been informed that the Sydney Synod voted to restrict the use of NDAs.  I’ve also been told that next year there’ll be an apology to people and there’s also advice to release people from them. That seems a great outcome, and has something of a Jubilee vibe to it.

System Life-Cycles

If your system has gotten to the stage that NDAs seem the sensible response, then perhaps you need to examine your system. NDAs are one of the symptoms of a system that has reached the declining side of the systems lifecycle.

Such systems have reached what is known as the “aristocracy” stage of the corporate cycle, in which brand protection is paramount. And protection of the longest-serving key owners is the default.

Churches that reach this stage often argue like this: There is an enemy out there hostile to the gospel and keen to put our every smudge mark on the front page of the local broadsheet newspaper or online blog. Why risk all our dirty stuff being exposed to the public? Better, in the big scheme of things, to protect the brand with a self-censoring measure.

But this is a time to remember this fact: our primary audience is not Joe Public, but Jesus Christ.  I believe that when ecosystems reach the aristocracy stage they are in desperate need of renewal and revival because they have let this fact fall of their radars.

They require a deep re-visioning of who Jesus is – meek and mild surely – but also the Jesus of Revelation 2-3 who burns with holy fire for his churches.

Two options are open to us in ministry leadership when we choose to shut down the problems rather than dealing with them: declining attitudes or declining attendance. We care less about our people, and we see less of other people.  It’s an option between slow painful death or deep painful change. Is there a non-pain option? There is not. Choose your pain.

Renewal and Revival

All ecosystems are in need of renewal and revival. Christian ecosystems especially.  And I believe a marker of both renewal and revival is a brave commitment to flush out the toxins within a system whatever the personal cost to you, or the relational ties to others.

We need to heed the words of 1Peter5:

To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder and a witnessof Christ’s sufferings who also will share in the glory to be revealed: Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away.

So we all know what not to do and what to do when it comes to leadership. The only thing now is the tricky part of putting that into practice without fear or favour.

And if we are in an ecosystem that can brilliantly exegete that passage in the Greek, then we better be able to brilliantly apply it in plain English. In other words, flush out the various Diotrophes from your system!

Don’t Turn a Blind Eye

Are there problematic people who need to be made to “go away”? People who are just causing havoc for their leaders, and who refuse to see how foolish they are. Immature types who need to protected for their own sakes and their future careers by an NDA?

For sure. But I suspect there are less leaders  lower down the food chain leaders who are problematic, than there are leaders further up the food chain who are problematic. And all things being equal, aristocratic systems tend to protect those further up.

Yet what does that mean for the next poor soul down the food chain who ends up working for the ongoing arcissist? Launder, rinse, repeat, that’s what.

My worry is that at some stage someone is going to do something tragic to themselves after having worked for a protected, unrepentant arcisisst who is well known to be so within the system.

It may well be a litigious age, and it may well be a therapeutic age, – and theologically astute types are quick to point this out – but I shudder to think what that particular trainwreck would look like. When figuring out how to deal with an arcisisst , ecosystems always take the long term view.

Take your licks now for the sake of avoiding them later. The alternative is that you become an enabler and enforcer of the problem. And that takes much longer to resolve. Indeed it may be fatal to your organisation if you are not careful.

If my experience of working in The Crowded House in Sheffield in the UK is any indicator, an arcissist ecosystem has opted for slow painful death. Every time an issue comes up to be resolved, it isn’t. Every time a hard conversation needs to be had, it is averted. Every time a leader needs to humble themselves before their team and say “sorry”, they don’t. And people leave hurt and wounded with no one any the wider.

Except Jesus of course.

Turning a blind eye to the toxic leader (arcissist OR narcissist) either through an NDA or publicly or privately maligning the offended party often enough to ensure they left with a poor reputation, is a sugar rush. But it will have long term consequences in this age, and the next.

The sheep don’t belong to us to do what we will with them. Let’s head 1 Peter 5.  Jesus is coming back for a bride, not a butcher. When he does come back he better not smell lamb barbecue.