Expired Fruit: Why Past Faithfulness Doesn’t Excuse Present Dysfunction

June 10, 2026June 14, 2026Leave a comment

As discussed in my last post, there is a difference between honoring leadership and respecting image preservation.

While Scripture commands us to respect those who labor among us, it also refuses to place any leader beyond examination, correction, or accountability. Somehow, in many churches, ministries, and organizations, we’ve managed to preach the first half while burying the second, using “protect the anointing” phraseology as an umbrella where insecurity, favoritism, micromanagement, even misconduct are tolerated.

But it usually doesn’t start there.

Most toxic cultures don’t begin with self-serving intentions. They begin with leaders who once did tremendous good.

Perhaps they pioneered something meaningful. Maybe they sacrificed deeply. Maybe they built ministries, companies, schools, nonprofits, or movements that changed lives. Maybe they weathered storms that others never saw.

All of that can be true.

But yesterday’s faithfulness does not exempt today’s behavior from scrutiny.

Past fruit is not a lifetime immunity badge. No organization is above the law. No leader is above correction. No “good old days” testimony can serve indefinitely as a veil covering present dysfunction.
Tweet

The danger emerges when the narrative becomes: “Look at all the good they’ve done.”

As though that somehow settles every concern. As though the people closest to the problems simply lack perspective. As though those asking questions are disloyal. As though silence is maturity.

It isn’t.

Because the moment preserving an image becomes more important than pursuing truth, the culture has already begun to drift.

Jethro Saw What Moses Couldn’t

One of the most overlooked leadership moments in Scripture comes in Exodus 18.

Moses loved God. Moses was called. Moses had demonstrated extraordinary faithfulness. Yet Jethro looked at him and essentially said: “What you’re doing isn’t working.”

“What you are doing is not good. You and these people who come to you will only wear yourselves out.” (Exodus 18:17-18)

Imagine that.

Moses—the man through whom God parted the Red Sea—was told that his leadership structure was unsustainable. Jethro wasn’t dishonoring Moses. He was protecting both Moses and the people.

He recognized something leaders often miss when responsibility concentrates at the top: The people suffer.

Jethro’s solution wasn’t blind loyalty. It wasn’t, “Everyone just support Moses harder.” It wasn’t, “Stop questioning and trust the process.”

It was accountability through structure. Shared responsibility. Distributed leadership. Healthy support systems.

“Select capable men from all the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain—and appoint them…” (Exodus 18:21)

Notice the qualifications. Capable. God-fearing. Trustworthy. Hating dishonest gain. Not merely agreeable. Not merely loyal. Not merely protective of leadership’s reputation.

Their purpose wasn’t to become professional yes-men. Their role was to support both Moses and the people.

Middle Managers Aren’t Human Shields

Healthy organizations understand this instinctively.

Middle leadership exists to bridge. To advocate upward and downward. To communicate concerns from subordinates to executives. To translate vision into practical care. To equip teams. To identify problems before they become crises.

They do not exist to absorb dysfunction generated from above. Nor do they exist to suppress concerns to preserve appearances.

If every concern raised by frontline employees dies in middle management because someone fears upsetting the Executive Director, CEO, President, Senior Pastor, or founder, then leadership has ceased to function as stewardship and has become image management.

The lower half of an organization cannot continually compensate for the gaps left by the upper half. Subordinates cannot indefinitely provide the emotional intelligence, conflict resolution, humility, and accountability that senior leadership refuses to exercise.

People eventually run out of capacity. They burn out. They disengage. Or they leave.

“If You Don’t Like It, Leave”

Sometimes that’s exactly what happens.

And ironically, unhealthy leadership often interprets the exodus as validation.

“Good riddance.”
“The wrong people are leaving.”
“God is purging the disloyal.”
“They couldn’t handle authority.”

But what if the departures aren’t evidence of rebellion?

What if they’re evidence of unresolved problems? What if sensible people with both healthy minds and compassionate hearts simply recognize smoke when they smell fire? What if repeated turnover isn’t proof of purification? What if it’s proof of suffocation?

The irony is painful.

The tighter toxic leadership closes its fist to secure control, the more people slip through its fingers. The very thing they fear losing becomes the outcome their methods produce.

Because fear can force compliance for a season. It cannot cultivate trust. Manipulation can manufacture unity for a moment. It cannot sustain genuine loyalty.

Unity Is Not Uniformity

Biblical unity was never intended to mean unanimous agreement with leadership.

Why? Because real unity makes room for truth. For questions. For dissent without retaliation. For hard conversations conducted with humility.

Paul publicly confronted Peter when Peter’s actions compromised the Gospel (Galatians 2:11-14). The early church gathered to reason together through conflict in Acts 15. Even Nathan confronted David.

Correction wasn’t viewed as betrayal. It was understood as love.

“Faithful are the wounds of a friend…” (Proverbs 27:6).

Yet some environments redefine unity to mean certain cooperation, even silence.

Don’t ask. Don’t challenge. Don’t notice patterns. Don’t connect dots. Just smile. Support. Protect the anointing.

At that point, unity becomes something entirely different. It becomes coercion wearing spiritual language.

Everyone Has a Voice

Will every complaint be valid? No.
Will every accusation prove true? No.
Will every frustrated employee be completely objective? Of course not.

But when concerns repeatedly surface from thoughtful people across different levels of an organization, dismissing every voice as bitterness eventually becomes its own form of deception.

Especially if those voices are consistently met with defensiveness rather than curiosity.

People can accept difficult answers.

What they struggle to accept is being unheard. A voice that perpetually falls on deaf ears eventually stops speaking. Not because it lacked merit. But because it learned the outcome had already been decided.

James instructs believers to be:

“Quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger” (James 1:19).

How often do organizations reverse that order?

Quick to defend. Quick to explain. Quick to protect. Slow to listen.

The Strongest Leaders Don’t Fear Accountability

The most secure leaders I’ve encountered don’t panic when questioned.

They don’t interpret feedback as mutiny. They don’t demand perpetual affirmation. They don’t surround themselves exclusively with people who echo their opinions.

They understand something profoundly important:

Accountability doesn’t diminish authority. It legitimizes it.
Correction doesn’t weaken leadership. It strengthens it.
Transparency doesn’t destroy trust. It builds it.

And repentance—when necessary—is not evidence that anointing has departed. It’s evidence that humility remains.
Tweet

Perhaps protecting the anointing has less to do with shielding leaders from scrutiny and more to do with protecting the integrity of what God entrusted to them in the first place.

Because God’s people deserve healthy leadership. Leaders deserve healthy support.

Middle managers deserve the freedom to advocate truthfully in both directions. And organizations deserve cultures where righteousness is valued more highly than reputation.

Christ-centered institutions should be the safest place in the world to tell the truth. Not because truth is painless. But because Christ Himself said:

“Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:32).

Anything less may preserve appearances for a season.

But eventually, every veil wears thin. And when that happens, the question won’t be whether concerns existed. The question will be whether anyone had the courage to listen before people felt they had no choice but to leave.

Cover graphic creds: Pkfuel.com

Office Angst: 7 Signs of a Toxic Workplace (Part 2)

March 22, 2024March 23, 2024Leave a comment

In my last post,  I examined the first four of seven toxic workplace traits and provided Biblical support to each section. For today, I want to conclude this series with my final three attributes along with a recap pod summarizing my points. As a reminder, while we’re exploring cultural and environmental red flags, we’re not hiding from leadership issues as the topics ultimately cannot be detached. 

Without further ado, let’s tie a bow on this…

5) Inconsistent Leadership

 When we talk about toxic work cultures, there are several dismissive characteristics we could cite from narcissism to manipulation to arrogance; however, there’s one, in particular, encompassing a multitude and that is incongruence (I.e. when a person’s actions contrast their words).

Ask any leader or tenured employee with authority and they’ll admit responsibility and accountability are essential to positive team performance and morale. Yet, where there are inconsistencies between expectation and execution, there is room for misinterpretation, miscommunication, tolerance, even negative emulation down the line.   

The good news here is the fix doesn’t have to be complicated: If you’re a team lead, supervisor, or director, walk the talk.

For example, if you say you’re not a micromanager, don’t micromanage, even if your intent is to the contrary. Rather, assess your intent to probe past normality and be willing to receive feedback if the actions involved communicate distrust or produce uncomfortable vibes. Remember seeking clarity is one thing but second-guessing motives without compassion, grace, and understanding is another. 

If you struggle to model any of these qualities, dare to explore any area where intention and action aren’t aligned. Naturally, no one should want to be inconsistent in their work; hence, why leaders especially should understand consistency isn’t limited to the fruit of one’s hands but also the words of their mouth and the reflections of their heart. 

Supporting Bible verses: Psalm 19, Matthew 7:3, Mathew 23:3, Luke 16:13, 1 Corinthians 15:58, Galatians 6:9, 1 John 4:20

6)  Overtolerance and Permissiveness

To be fair, this point flows from the one prior, but based on perceived abuse, this warrants a separate explanation. If you say certain actions won’t be tolerated, don’t make the principles behind them conditional. Instead of granting exceptions based on seat or situation, handle moral failures and detrimental conducts consistently regardless if the person involved in an established personality or rookie within their probationary period.

From what I’ve seen, the top-down ripple effect of steady rationale and decision making can be empowering in the long term, even if it’s messy in the short term. Whenever trust bends or breaks, abiding by proper protocol will not only enhance security but also encourage people to adhere to higher standards of integrity. 

Put another way, if you’re a leader, don’t sacrifice reproach by synonymizing forgiveness and tolerance. If an employee has an established track record of poor conduct, scale the offense, and timely oversee the appropriate actions in a way that benefits the whole of the team. When in doubt, just say ‘no’ to permissiveness and ‘yes’ to due diligence and follow-through.

Supporting Bible verses: Proverbs 21:16, Romans 6:1-2, 11-15; 2 Timothy 4:1-2, Ephesians 4:2, 1 Peter 3:8-11

7)  Lack of awareness and accountability 

No workplace is perfect, and employees, leaders and teams may display negative traits from time to time. However, if that behavior is pervasive, leadership must consider how the culture they’ve cultivated may be impacting the trend. Unless a single employee is the root of the hostility, a leader best serves their company by investigating beyond the conflict into its source region.

Often, if an employee starts deregulating, there’s a corporate tie-in, be it a lack of recognition/development, unclear communications, and/or insecurity. Yet, even if these currents aren’t underlying, there could be larger problems involving personal, domestic, and/or health issues, which leads me to a key point:

When a work boundary is breached, don’t automatically assume ill-intent but gauge the transparency of your corporate principles and reassess them before the repercussions.
Tweet

Handled the right way, a potentially volatile situation can de-escalate into a refreshing reset when humility meets resolution. Conversely, if a leadership committee lacks awareness and accountability, the employee will almost always follow suit.

For instance, you may have a teammate or subordinate who acts ignorantly at times. Yet perhaps he/she feels ignored, like a number within a company that hoards autonomy and withholds clarity. In these cases, don’t deal with the contention topically but with meekness that anticipates understanding.

‘Cause truth is: If leaders and teams don’t take inventory of their internal processes and how they affect personnel, discouragement, even burn-out will inevitably result. Why not rightfully deal and scale tension internally before your clients and supporters smell smoke?

Supporting Bible verses: Proverbs 11:14, Proverbs 27:17, Ephesians 4:15, James 5:16, Hebrews 10:24-25, 1 Thessalonians 5:11

As always, selah, thank you for reaching and…

Cover photo creds: Wellable

Office Angst: 7 Signs of a Toxic Workplace (Part 1)

March 8, 2024August 28, 20241 Comment

Recently, I was driving to work and it occurred to me: By the end of this year, I will have reached the 15-year mark as a full-time employee in corporate America. Crazy how time flies (or Frys in my case), eh?

While I’ve benefited from tight teams in years past, I’ve also worked on some, ahem, not so tight teams educating me to the contrary. With a notable marketplace mileage marker on the horizon, I want to examine some signs of toxic leadership/work culture as well as how we can overcome within our co-worker in Christ identity (1 Corinthians 3:9).

As always, let’s dive in!

1. Teammates aren’t treated as diverse in function, co-equal in value.

While diversity, inclusivity, and equality discussions are expected initiatives in today’s marketplace, let’s be honest: How committed are most employers to consistently upholding these principles? As much as we gravitate towards hierarchy, performance-based metrics, and capitalistic tendencies, the bottom line to this point is essentially outcome divided by constancy.

In the long run, no organization can reach its potential without each member understanding and operating within their value.
Tweet

Granted, some leave it to the individual to derive their own sense of purpose which can be fair in the context of guiding from a distance. Otherwise, vocationals should know whatever systems they’re in cannot reach their ceiling if people aren’t treated as diverse in function, co-equal in value.

Think about it: If your work leadership encourages favoritism and limits opportunities to a select few, then odds are teamwide morale will decrease and internal tension will increase. Why is this? I submit the significance of this reality is due to it being one of deepest core corporate identities. From an original design perspective, we were (and are) intended to serve as one body. Applied to the marketplace, this means we steward structures that provide equal opportunity for growth to every position and take the same approach to feedback and general engagement (More on this in a future post as honestly, this is one of my favorite topics to discuss).

Note: To those in high-level positions, consider the Jethro principles and seek to execute them effectively so middle managers are accountable to develop those under their care. If you’re young and starting out, find a leader or seasoned veteran with mentorship potential and watch how they respond to feedback and instruction. Who knows? Even if the culture is weak, you may still be able to derive motivation and inspiration from those who are secure in their strengths.

Supporting Bible verses: Hebrews 10:25, 1 Corinthians 12:12-27, 1 Corinthians 3:9, Exodus 18:14-26

2. Passive-aggressive and/or manipulative leadership.

Another side-effect of toxic leadership involves the deliberate withholding of constructive criticism, encouragement, and/or gratitude. In a post-pandemic world, you may have noticed passive-aggressive supervisors falling into one of these camps, using silence or support withdrawal as primary communications tools; however, under no circumstances, should these behaviors be tolerated.

‘Cause truth is: A mature leader not only knows when and how to deliver feedback but facilitates phycological safety, trust, and confidence in challenging situations. If you’re in an environment where leaders have ambushing agendas, redelegate tasks without proper communication, or uses silence to communicate, then I have news for you:

You deserve better!
Leaders who drive wedges and/or use ego to stir division aren’t true leaders!

Of course, I’m not suggesting you abandon ship if you’re currently working under a similar authority. Conversely, I’m encouraging you to take inventory of offenses, collect your emotions, and find a time to speak with the appropriate authority (I.e. supervisor or HR Manager depending on the situation) to clear the air. As long as you integrate other voices and honor your leaders and colleagues, your intentions will be well grounded as you steward peace, advocacy, and forward motion.

Supporting Bible verses: Proverbs 11:14, Proverbs 28:2-26, Romans 16:17-18, James 3:14, Ephesians 4:14, Luke 16:8b, Matthew 5:37

3. Lack of trust, communication, and engagement.

Per point #2, if a leader lacks trust, even with a subordinate, the ideal move is to confront the issue fostering the deficit or dissonance. Generally, an employee who feels they aren’t trusted wants to discern areas of improvement; hence, why indifference, or the perception thereof, is not only deflating but often an overflow of a toxic environment.

As you may have learned in your own experiences, a lack of communication will almost always create some form of chaos, angst, or strife, but sound leaders are keen to promote the well-being of their teammates. Remember an occasional check-in or positive acknowledgement can go a long way in reinforcing a worker’s understanding of their value while also regulating their emotions. Regardless of our role, dare to diffuse discord through compassionate engagement and curiosity.

Supporting Bible verses: 1 Corinthians 15:33-44, Titus 3:10

4. No formal review process and/or pathway for development.

As an employee with public, private, and liturgical experience, I can speak candidly to this point having seen this process mapped out a variety of ways. If your employer has no formal performance evaluation process where the only criticism is given in moments of error, then you have a major red flag in your hand.

As my time has taught me, all employees deserve to know if the work they’re doing is effective and efficient. Since we’ve established feedback and communication withholding as signs of environmental toxicity, the call here is straight-forward: Develop and promote a review process where all team members top-down are accountable and have a means to build areas of strength and weakness alike. Even if the meeting frequency is quarterly or biannual, the impacts can be massive as you streamline a process to preserve morale in tandem with corporate performance.

Supporting Bible verses: James 1:19, Proverbs 15:1, Colossians 4:6

Stay tuned next time when I’ll conclude this post with my final three points including a podcast overviewing the content. For now…