“Great is the art of beginning, but greater is the art of ending.”

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

April 26, 2019- Brentwood, Tennessee

At 5:25pm, I squeezed Nathan’s hand as we made our way across the parking lot. I had traded my typical stay-at-home mom uniform of comfortable clothes for a dressy top and skirt. Silently, we crossed the now-empty courtyard toward the private doorway to the Human Resources office at Financial Peace Plaza. More than seven years had passed since I sat and waited for my spousal interview with Nathan’s then-potential employer whom I had hoped would offer my husband a job. This interview stood in stark contrast to the first.

That interview I was invited to; to this one, I invited myself.

It seemed only right that I would be there, since this company had been such a critical part of both of our lives. There was no way I was going to stay home. After almost 16 years of marriage, Nathan wasn’t surprised I was willing to walk in to the appointment uninvited. “Audacious” is how he described it. Nathan opened the door and we walked in together.

So many things had changed. What was the same, though, was my absolute confidence in Nathan. In 2011, I knew they would be foolish not to hire him. In 2019, I was convinced they were fools to let him walk away.

This is how I remember this scene. Nathan and I were ushered into the conference room together. Rick Perry, a long-time team member in the Ramsey Human Resources department, Director of Culture, took a seat diagonally across the corner of the massive conference room table. We took our seats. It was a large room, but I remember feeling like the table swallowed most of it. I placed my purse down. Next to me was Nathan. His hands held a small, simple, notebook. I jokingly referred to it as his magic book. It held scribbles on everything from sermon notes to work team meetings to unintelligible-to-me web developer jargon. Nathan carried his notebook in a leather case he made himself. Clean, understated, and functional. It didn’t look remarkable on the outside, but don’t let the appearance deceive you. The inside is invaluable: that magic book and Nathan. In my recollection, Nathan had another book on the table in front of him: EntreLeadership: 20 Years of Practical Business Wisdom from the Trenches. Nathan disputes this. He says he left it at home.

He’s probably right. If it wasn’t there physically, we had it on our minds. Over the last week, both of us had re-read it and highlighted portions we found applicable to this current situation.

This one in particular was on my mind: “A simple principle we use to ask if, when making this decision, the move causes you to lie or hide the truth (which is a type of lying). That seems so obvious but when there is a large stressful situation that can be made to go away by sweeping it under the rug it is tempting to do so, even for those among us with the most integrity.” (Entreleadership, p 70)

I had highlighted this one as well. “If you discover a character flaw like an integrity problem or stealing, the team member has to leave immediately that day.”

If they were surprised to see me, they hid it well.

Armando Lopez, the Director of HR, greeted us warmly and sat next to us. We chatted like old friends as we wondered at how many years had passed since Nathan first was hired. I retold the story of how reading the EntreLeadership book had made me want to start my own business. “You should!” Rick encouraged me. There was a brief lull in the conversation, and then Armando guided the discussion toward the reason we were there on a Friday night at 5:30. The feeling in the room shifted from small-talk to serious. “There aren’t many names that cross my desk that surprise me,” he said, “But yours did, Nathan.” The sadness in his eyes looked genuine. He continued, “I have to ask, is there anything we could have done to avoid this outcome?”

Nathan and I looked at each other in bewilderment. I gestured widely and haltingly said, “This whole situation.”

Armando continued, “I ask because sometimes, as you know, we have information you aren’t aware of. Would it have helped to bring you both into a meeting with some more people and give you more information?”

I briefly exchanged a glance with Nathan and answered first, with no hesitation. “We’re confident we know the truth and that we’re making the right choice.” I looked at Rick and Armando, and back to Nathan and added, “I’ve never been more proud of my husband.”

Rick and Armando both quickly affirmed they, too, were proud of Nathan.

In retrospect, I wish I had pressed them on this. What exactly were they proud of? If the Human Resources team was proud of Nathan, why had Nathan been told by a Board member, Nathan “knew what to do. . .,” insinuating that Nathan’s questions of their handling of a situation meant he should leave? Armando’s words caused us to wonder if he knew all the details involved in Nathan’s resignation or if this was just one more attempt to confuse the facts.

Nathan weighed-in next. I wished he was more firm, but that’s not his style. He was gracious, but clear. He couldn’t stay. He shared several examples of culture shift and business decisions that made him uncomfortable. When he finished talking, Rick passed a paper to Nathan.

“A wise man wrote these words a long time ago.”

I read the words on that paper:

“My life is a gift, with which I serve the Giver, steward what is given— my family, talents, time— and guide others to recognize His immense creativity and generosity. Nathan Fritz 3/2/12”.

It was the mission statement Nathan had written during his first 90 days with the company. Rick continued, “I believe you’re following your mission.” He stood up, shook Nathan’s hand, and excused himself leaving Armando with us to go over the final paperwork. The words Nathan wrote were true, but we found out, after a conversation with another friend who had just resigned, that Rick had said those exact same words to him.

We found out later, Dave had stood before the entire company days after Nathan’s resignation and referred to people who had recently left as having no backbone and believing lies.

So, maybe those words shared at the exit interview weren’t as heartfelt as portrayed?

A handful of papers later and then it was time. Armando took us up to the third floor and buzzed us into the office area that had been deserted at the end of the work day. He shook our hands and wished us well. Then he turned, walked out the door, and left Nathan and I alone to gather what remained of his personal belongings and to say, “goodbye” to the empty workspace where he had worked for over seven years.

With just Nathan and I in the room, the only sound was the HVAC fans. Any other time, you wouldn’t hear them, but today their sound filled the room. I wandered around the room and took a few photos while Nathan wrote a web developer joke on the white board.

He moved a sign from his now-empty desk to John’s. “Nathan is not working on the refactoring”. I swallowed the lump in my throat as I thought about John who had sat next to Nathan for six years. Nathan was going to miss him. I would miss that for him. I prayed John would understand and that he would still want to be Nathan’s friend.

It felt like watching something die.

It felt sad and heavy like a funeral for someone who had died unexpectedly. I thought back to how we had taken a leap of faith when we accepted this job and how we were taking an even bigger leap with leaving it. When I later asked Nathan what he was feeling during this moment, he noted realizing how quickly his presence there would be erased. For over 7 years, he invested his best in this organization and it only took a few minutes to gather up his things, leaving no trace he was ever there. Leaving that note on the white board was one last attempt to say, “Nathan Fritz was here.”

There is something in all of us that desires to leave our mark on a place.

The truth is, even if Nathan’s name is rarely or never spoken again, his fingerprints are all over his former team. He left part of himself in the code he wrote. He left part of himself in the people still there. In a poetic twist, Nathan actually did leave something there. Instead of putting it in the canvas Aldi bag he brought to carry out his personal items, Nathan forgot that his ewok figurine was on John’s desk.

I had read an article when we were first contemplating our move to Tennessee. The author had interviewed someone who was in the middle of planting a new church. She said they were so far out on a limb with Jesus, but that the view was amazing. I’ve never forgotten those words and I’ve seen them ring true. There are some things you can see more clearly when you’re standing on that limb. Rick was right. Nathan was staying true to his mission. In EntreLeadership, Dave Ramsey writes, “Integrity also means consistency. If you react the same way every time in every similar situation, you don’t have to put your company values in a brochure, because your team sees them lived every day.”

I was proud of Nathan’s integrity. Sadly, we had come to believe this was not a value that was consistently embraced across the Ramsey organization.

A few minutes later, it was our turn to walk out the door. One more ride in the elevator. One more reminder of stated core values. One in particular stood out to me:

“Righteous Living. We believe character matters all the time.”

It’s a value we still believed, but had been heartbroken to suspect, some in leadership didn’t. We continued through the lobby, and then, for the first time, instead of walking out the “Team Member” exit, Nathan led us straight out the main doors.

We left behind a place that had been a home for us in many ways. It was the right choice. It was the hardest choice. Wade Mullen says, “Many people want to continue to enjoy what the abusive community produces– things like teachings, works of art, or services. By doing so, they provide the nourishment that the abusive community needs to grow strong.” (Something’s Not Right, p 181)

We couldn’t be a part of it any more even though it meant jumping with no safety net. We hoped it would make a difference.

“No one leaves home unless
Home is the mouth of a shark
You only run for the border
When you see the whole city running as well”

Warsan Shire, Home

Related:

Podcast Episodes about Ramsey

Our Story of Leaving Ramsey Solutions

What’s Wrong with Unconditional Loyalty

Is Dave Ramsey’s Empire The Best Place to Work in America? Say No and You’re Out

Dave Ramsey, personal Christian finance guru defies COVID-19 to keep staff at desks

Statement from Melissa J. Hogan

The post Exit Interviews & Believing Character Matters appeared first on Amy Fritz.

In April of 2020, I shared some of our family’s story regarding leaving Ramsey Solutions. After a lot of prayer and carefully choosing each word I shared, I knew it was the right thing to do and the right time to do it. You can read it here. In the same way, I came to realize that this was the right time to go on the record with a trusted journalist who cares about truth and integrity more than a salacious story.

Since late 2011, when my husband began his interview process with Ramsey Solutions, I was very much involved in the Ramsey Solutions experience. I found the job posting. I encouraged him to apply. I participated in several spousal interviews, and shortly after Nathan started his job there, I became an administrator on the Lampo Ladies Facebook page. I invested a lot of time and energy into welcoming new people and helping them get adjusted to life in TN (if they moved here from out of state). I felt as committed to the Lampo Group (Ramsey Solutions) as my husband did.

I can talk about our experience because it’s not just Nathan’s experience.

A note to our friends who still work at Ramsey Solutions:

I know how hard it is to hear negative things about a place that provides your paycheck. I know how confusing it is when your own experience is a good one. I know the sick feeling of just wanting all the chatter to stop. I’ve felt it many times. If you have any questions, whether you are an employee or a spouse, I welcome conversation with you. It is not “gossip” for one to share their own story or for you to ask about our personal experience.

My only desire for this is to honor God and allow people to know the truth of our experience.

The post A note from Amy appeared first on Amy Fritz.

It wasn’t until recently that I realized that there were things missing. Somehow the decision-making matrix didn’t include much consideration to a bigger question.  How do we vote in a way that is consistent with the second greatest commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves?

In other words, I had always approached political involvement as a way to protect my religious expression and my personal well-being.

I found a hole in my politics.

I know way too many conservative voters who personally engage in a way that cares for their community and the world to paint an entire group as selfish and uncaring. I’m going to point the finger at myself, instead.

I have had an embarrassing lack of concern regarding issues that didn’t impact me personally. Race issues didn’t concern me. I gave no consideration to the fact that the US had severely restricted the entrance of refugees. I had never cared to have the government do anything about health care because I had insurance. I’ve always been against raising any taxes at all because I assumed that the lack of funding was due to poor money management. I could go on. You get the point.

I’m not saying any particular party has the corner on the right answers to these issues. What I am saying is I never thought of how my vote might help someone else.  25 years of voting and just now I’m considering the common good.

Hannah Anderson and Erin Straza had a conversation about this on their podcast. They discussed the idea that there is a fear of a scarcity of goodness.  It almost stopped me in my tracks. Yes. I’ve felt this and I’ve heard it from others.

Is there enough good to go around? What if I work for the good of others and no one reciprocates?

Am I willing to be the answer to my prayers?

As I’m writing this, we’re almost two weeks out from the 2020 Presidential election. While Americans are waiting on lawsuits to be settled, I’m reading. This week I’m finishing The Liturgy of Politics: Spiritual Formation For the Sake of our Neighbor. My eyes zoomed in on the author’s mention of the Biblical account of Ruth. When Boaz meets Ruth and sees her character he says this: “May the Lord repay you for what you have done. May you be richly rewarded by the Lord, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come to take refuge.”

“A chapter later, Ruth essentially asks Boaz to be the answer to his own prayer”. . . “if we’re going to pray for God to protect and provide for the foreigner, the widow, and the vulnerable, we should also be willing to be the answer to our own prayers.” (Kaitlyn Schiess, The Liturgy of Politics)

Gulp.

I’m asking this of myself.  What does it look like to have my spiritual formation impact my political involvement? What am I missing?

More and more I’m seeing the way individualism is sneaking into our churches and our politics.  I wonder if one of the answers to rampant divisiveness is to embrace a posture that sees political involvement not as a political act, but a community one.

The post Are We Willing to be the Answer to our Own Prayers? appeared first on Amy Fritz.

4 years ago, in the aftermath of a painful church situation, I stumbled across a video from Dr. Langberg. I wrote about it here. To make a long story short, we were attempting to make sense of one thing and realized it was another. The idea that narcissism could not only infect an individual, but also a system, was life-changing.

I’ve been collecting books related to the subject for 3 years. I snapped a photo of my book pile and sent it to a group of my friends. My friend, Lauren sent a text back: “Ah, I see you have the Recovering From Abuse starter pack.”

If that were an actual thing, and it should be, it would include Dr. Langberg’s new book Redeeming Power: Understanding Authority and Abuse in the Church.

Dr. Langberg shares what healthy, Biblical power looks like. She pulls from her experience with trauma victims all over the world. In so doing, we benefit from her wisdom- wisdom that comes from being formed by a long journey of being discipled by Biblical principles of power. Finally, she reminds the reader of what the Good Shepherd looks like.  I closed the book more grateful for Jesus. I think you will too.

***

Here are some of my favorite quotes:

“When we hear Scriptural words about building up the church for the glory of God, the work sounds heavenly.  But when the building materials are arrogance, coercion, and aggression, the outcome is hideous.”

“We don’t believe that the powerful leaders we admire could possibly abuse their power. We don’t want to see because if we see, we must either act or carry the guilt of not having done so.”

“Your value as a shepherd depends on your life as a lamb, a weak, foolish lamb, utterly dependent on the Good Shepherd.”

***

In 2016, when I first discovered Dr. Langberg’s work, I was sure God brought it at just the right time to help us through that painful time. What I didn’t know in 2016 was that this would be a  tool we would use to separate truth from lies several years later.

It changed everything.

You probably think I’m exaggerating. I’m not. We were seeing rotten things and we couldn’t, in good conscience, pretend not to. 3 years of learning Biblical truth about power abuse and how it can even manifest in systems and individuals claiming Christ’s name prepared us.  “. . . if we see, we must act or carry the guilt of not having done so.”

It has been painful, but we have no regrets.

I wish we didn’t need a book about power abuse in  Christendom. I wish we didn’t need to be reminded that we should care more about character than we do about giftedness. Since we do, this book is a great resource.

The post A Spiritual Abuse Safeguard appeared first on Amy Fritz.

How did the congregation respond to the noise of the train as they gathered each week? As the train barreled by and the whistle shrieked, they sang louder.

(image via Unsplash)

We need to stop using the phrase, “I can’t believe it,” to express our dismay over the brutal butchering of George Floyd. Our black brothers and sisters have been begging us to pay attention.  At some point, “I can’t believe it,” is an innocuous way of saying, “I didn’t believe you,” or “I wasn’t paying attention.”

What will it take to draw a line and declare, “No more”? Is the footage of a murder broadcast to the entire world enough? We’ve sung over the train whistle for too long.

How do we miss the injustice happening right outside our windows?

Willful ignorance. The most difficult injustice to recognize is the injustice that comes from the hand that benefits us. We’ve chosen willful ignorance because the cost to do otherwise is to lose the benefit we have enjoyed from these abusive systems.

What systems do we benefit from that are crushing our neighbors?

• The group that makes us feel like we belong.
• The club with amazing perks.
• The place that sends us a paycheck.
• The leader that promised us a position.
• The politician who promised protection and power.

What would you do if someone were to tell you these systems were acting unjustly?  They are telling us now. Would you believe it? Would you counsel them to not speak of it?  Commitment to the cause of the oppressed comes with a cost.

How bad does it have to get for us to be willing to see the truth? Because, chances, are, we’re all benefiting from something that’s leaving a body count. And it’s dangerously close to making fools of us as we change our walk home to avoid seeing it.

Lord forgive us. Bring us to the point where all the air freshener were pumping out is overcome by the sickly smell of a rotting system and we can’t ignore it anymore.

Other Resources:

Be the Bridge: Pursuing God’s Heart for Racial Reconciliation

Breonna Taylor, invisible black women and God who sees us.

White Privilege Statistics and Data

We Have an Abuse Problem

The post Is This Willful Ignorance? appeared first on Amy Fritz.

Narcissistic  Systems

After finding a quote from her, I rabbit-trailed until I discovered a video entitled, “Narcissism and the System it Breeds.” Like any good nerd, I pressed play and took notes. What she had to say blew me away. It made such an impression on me, I asked Nathan to watch.

As he watched the video, I watched him. I  jumped in and paused the recording from time to time and said things like, “See?” and “What do you think?” and “Doesn’t that sound exactly like  what we experienced?” I was learning things about narcissism I had never heard before. It gave me a framework upon which to hang some painful experiences.

What stood out to me the most was that narcissism doesn’t merely manifest itself in individuals. Narcissism infects systems.

A light bulb turned on.

I began to understand that an organization could terminate its relationship with a narcissist and still be unhealthy. The exit of one unhealthy person doesn’t solve the problem if narcissism is embedded in the organization itself.

 In fact, a narcissistic system exacerbates the hurt of those who have already been victimized. This leads to multiple traumas for victims. They believed the system would protect them from the narcissist only to discover the system exists to protect itself.

Dr. Langberg went on to say that a crisis helps reveal the character of the narcissist. In the end, the narcissist is a wolf that feeds off the sheep. He doesn’t protect them. Vulnerable people assumed they were following a shepherd. Too late, they realize they have been fooled.

Over the last 4 years, I’ve recommended Diane Langberg’s work to anyone who feels they may have experienced pain from a narcissistic leader. She has a book coming out in the fall, Redeeming Power: Understanding Authority and Abuse in the Church. I’m so grateful for her work. You can find more resources from her here.

How The Mighty Fall

Another thing I did to try to make sense of what I was seeing in church culture was to read. Last summer I picked up one of Nathan’s business books. I spent time paging through How the Mighty Fall by Jim Collins. This book shares a helpful model that describes how many organizations go through stages of decline .

This is where I admit I had to look up the definition of “hubris”.

Hubris is defined as “excessive pride or self-confidence”.  Stage one in this model sounds an awful lot like organizational narcissism. It’s an easy slide from hubris to narcissism. If Collins’ model is accurate, it’s not only businesses that could be on the path to destruction. Churches are susceptible too. Proverbs 16:18 confirms this: “Pride comes before destruction and an arrogant spirit before a fall.”

We all want to be part of something special.

I started to wonder if one of the problems with American evangelicalism was the desire to be a part of something special. We don’t call it arrogance or pride. However, we’re suckers for being a part of something that is “uniquely positioned” by God to change to the world. We’re proud to be a part of that special church or mission.

Where is the line between healthy regard for our faith communities and sinful pride? Would we know if we crossed it?

What’s the outcome when beloved institutions are considered so crucial to God’s mission they need to be protected at all costs? What do we do when an “anointed” leader hurts someone? If we’re not careful institutional pride can turn to systemic narcissism. This unhealthy system breeds leaders that feed off the sheep calling it “servant leadership” when it’s anything but.

Systemic Narcissism at Willow Creek?

I’m fascinated by church health. I’m not an expert, but I’m curious if there is a pattern happening in our churches that looks like the model created by Collins. In studying the fall of Bill Hybels, former pastor of Willow Creek Community Church, I’ve started to wonder if the entire Willow Creek system may have been dealing with hubris from early success. (organizational narcissism)

(Image via Religion News Service)

For years, pastors and leaders flocked to Willow Creek to learn from them. In 1992 they started the Willow Creek Global Leadership Summit. Annually thousands of people would watch the Summit to learn about how to be better pastors and leaders. All the while, the Willow Creek senior pastor was allegedly engaging in sexually inappropriate words and actions. The elder board failed to take these allegations seriously until the truth was revealed to the public.

Would a narcissistic organization recognize when they were heading for trouble?

When an organization portrays themself as the gold standard for leadership and ministry practices, does that make it harder to admit wrongdoing? That’s a question I’ve been considering. Was the cost too high to admit the truth? Could they engage in honest self-reflection when they were making so much money teaching others the best way to lead? How could they admit a failure in leadership when they led a global summit on leadership?

When an institution places so much value on being the best that it becomes a part of their identity, that leaves little room for self-reflection.  Such a place would be resistant to anything that challenged that identity– even the truth. 

Arthur Andersen

Dennis Duchon and Brian Drake wrote a paper entitled Organizational Narcissism and Virtuous Behaviour. In it, they reference Arthur Andersen, the accounting firm caught shredding evidence for Enron. It was once known for its ethical culture. The founder was well-known for being an honorable man. Arthur Andersen even had a consulting group that taught other companies how to manage their ethics. Unfortunately, as their business model shifted, they didn’t stay true to their founder’s virtuous behavior. Duchon and Drake describe Arthur Andersen as having a “narcissistic identity, characterized by a sense of entitlement, self-aggrandizement, and denial.”

They go on to explain the end result when narcissistic organizations participate in unethical behavior:

“To an outsider, these practices are obviously wrong, but insiders who have internalized the cultures’ logic cannot see anything wrong. Insiders see themselves and the behavior of the organizations they work for as good and right. To question or deny these propositions is to threaten the collective identity, which can not be tolerated.”

It’s sobering.  There’s a denial that results from daily breathing the air of a system that considers itself especially good. Dr. Langberg suggests that it takes breathing in the fresh air outside of the infected system to fully see the truth.

This isn’t an “out there” problem

As I started learning about narcissism, I wanted to point the finger away from myself. My husband says, “No one thinks they are the villain.” (Nathan isn’t sure where he first heard that quote. It’s not original to him) But if we truly believe that we’re sinful,  I need to admit that I’m not immune. I’ve shared Ryan Ramsey’s words on the topic several times. They still ring true:

“I believe that in God’s mercy that door is often cracked open repeatedly in the life of a system bearing His name. He is staggeringly patient and kind. But He will not turn a blind eye or campaign the preservation of our systems. If we are guided by the sin of loyalty (the toxic kind I’m describing) we will slam the door shut every time it opens for fear of what we could lose. If we are guided by the Spirit of God we will have courage to open the door and encounter the possibility of change.”

Criticism as God’s Mercy

What if individually and collectively, we accepted criticism as God’s mercy? Entertaining the idea that we could be wrong keeps that door open to transformation. That’s the point of the work of the Holy Spirit. He keeps transforming as long as we have breath. We need this transformation as long as we have breath.

The upside-down kingdom

God chooses to allow us to be a part of what He is doing because of His grace, but He doesn’t need us. It’s humbling, but what a relief! Isn’t it interesting that God chose the least likely son of Jesse to be king? His own father hadn’t even considered him a candidate. He chose a shepherd. Likewise, Matthew 5 tells us who Jesus says are especially blessed: the poor in spirit, those who mourn, the merciful and humble. . .  I Corinthians 1:27 says this:

” But God chose the foolish things of this world to put the wise to shame. He chose the weak things of this world to put the powerful to shame.”

In a culture that increasingly elevates the powerful, the gospel rejects power. That sounds like a good antidote to the narcissism that tugs at all of us. Ironically, what started with my desire to figure out what was wrong “out there” ended with an answer that pointed partially back to myself.

Well played, God.

The post Organizational Narcissism & The Upside-Down Kingdom appeared first on Amy Fritz.

I’ve written a few things publicly. This feels like the right time to share more of our details for those who wanted to hear directly from us, but maybe felt like they couldn’t or shouldn’t ask.

When my husband first resigned, we felt it was appropriate to mostly stay silent. We didn’t want to put our friends who remained at the organization in an awkward situation. However, we have learned that this situation was partially addressed publicly at the company itself. This is one motivation for a public response.

The Beginning of the End

In late 2018/early 2019, Nathan and I independently came across some information that indicated that a team member at the company might not be living in alignment with the core values of the organization. This particular situation had huge ramifications. In many organizations it wouldn’t be a big deal, but in this one, the CEO has blog posts and books that clearly state what this company stands for. And this matter had the potential to impact people we truly cared about.

Nathan and I stayed silent and prayed over it for two months. We hoped somehow something would happen to alleviate our concerns. To the contrary, during that time, our concerns only increased because of situations we observed.

By late February/early March, Nathan and I agreed it was time to bring this up to his immediate supervisor. Nathan followed the procedure his employer had put in place – communicate up the chain. We were well aware the stakes were high. We prayed constantly and only shared this with Nathan’s leader.

This leader listened to Nathan’s concerns. Nathan left the meeting encouraged that he had been taken seriously. His leader said he was praying about his next steps and also affirmed that he had similar concerns prior to this conversation with Nathan. He didn’t feel that it was appropriate to discuss this with Nathan. His own concerns would be communicated up and through appropriate channels just as Nathan was doing with him.

We continued to pray.  A month later, Nathan’s leader unexpectedly announced his resignation. In a final meeting with Nathan, he let Nathan know he had shared Nathan’s concerns with Ramsey leadership. They would be reaching out to Nathan to set up a meeting. That’s how my husband found himself in a meeting with two members of the operating board.

A Meeting with Ramsey Leadership

In that meeting, Nathan listened as a board member offered unsolicited information that confirmed his worst fears. Until that moment, Nathan and I had not had any conversations that confirmed what was most concerning us. This board member may have believed she was reassuring Nathan that although certain information was true, it could be minimized by having happened a long time ago. This perspective didn’t reassure him. The confirmation and then the minimization of it by representatives of the company gave us serious pause.

The timeline offered by the board member still clearly conflicted with positions on core values maintained by the company. In addition, our own observations led us to believe this was not a singular or “long time ago” problem.

At the conclusion of the meeting, Nathan was advised to go home and pray with me. She said we needed to decide if we trusted their handling of this situation. Nathan said she trailed off after that. The message Nathan received was that if he decided he didn’t trust their handling of this, he would need to resign.

That night was agonizing. Nathan and I were heartbroken (I wrote about it here). We wanted this organization to be the place they represented themselves to be. There was no way to reconcile the inconsistency we were seeing between the publicly espoused core values and what Nathan was being told. We felt a deep conviction that the board members had not been completely honest about this situation.

Other Concerns

I want to be clear. If this had been the only red flag we had seen, we might have been able to trust the way the leadership was handling this. It wasn’t the only red flag. As the years passed, especially as they were working toward cash-flowing the new building(s), it felt like the pressure was on to increase revenue. There’s nothing wrong with creating a successful business, but some of the ways they went about it made Nathan uncomfortable, and we wondered if they were crossing some lines. It also felt like they were measuring success more by revenue than by changed lives. To be clear, there is a correlation between those things at a typical for-profit company. However, Ramsey Solutions is openly built on Christian principles, and in all-company meetings, emphasizes their mission to share the Gospel as well as financial hope. There were tactics we felt were inconsistent with these principles.

Best Place to Work Contest

One example is that Nathan and I were both uneasy with the communication to team members when it came to the annual survey they filled out for the Nashville Business Journal “best place to work” contest. One recent year they didn’t win. Nathan reported to me that a board member shared during a team meeting their extreme disappointment that a few employees had given negative feedback on the survey. The message given during the team meeting was if you can’t give good scores on the survey, you shouldn’t be working at the company. It felt like there was no room for disagreement, constructive criticism, or for anyone to have any opinion other than “this is the best place to work with no room for improvement.”

For a place that makes a lot of money teaching others how to run their businesses, this sort of behavior made us uncomfortable.

Handling Criticism

Personally, I had been feeling increasingly uncomfortable with the way Dave would respond to those who disagreed with him. In listening to the daily radio show, I heard a consistent use of mocking and misrepresentation of people who questioned him. And although we had seen some ways he could be incredibly kind and generous, we had also seen signs of narcissism that alarmed us. Our brains were experiencing what I now know to be cognitive dissonance – where what you are being told does not match what you are experiencing and your brain is desperately trying to make sense of it.

We did our best to put our misgivings aside because we still believed in the mission. That’s been one of the most mind-bending parts of this situation. This organization has done great good. There are many who work there who are wonderful people, who believe in helping others, and who love Jesus. Still, we can’t discount the accounts of people who have experienced great pain due to some parts of the organization we believe to be unhealthy. This can be hard for some to reconcile since the organization is big enough that if you’re in a healthy team, you may never see the parts of the company that are not.

One way or another, eventually, God would have moved us on. We just didn’t expect it to happen the way it did. We had been holding on to hope that our misgivings were things that would get better. After Nathan’s meeting with the board members, our hope evaporated.

Nathan’s Resignation

On April 25th, 2019, Nathan sat in a room with those same two executive board members one last time. He was honest. Nathan admitted he didn’t trust that they were handling this situation in keeping with the company’s stated core values. In addition, he shared some other misgivings. In response, the executive board member who had been doing most of the talking in the previous meeting, dismissively suggested that this situation wasn’t the real problem and accused Nathan of losing faith in them long ago.

You know what? She was wrong.

They lost Nathan’s trust. The way she framed that statement gave the impression that this was something Nathan had done wrong. But Nathan’s loss of trust came about due to things he had observed and experienced. That fault does not lie with Nathan.

It’s taken almost a year, but Nathan is no longer willing to carry that false guilt. Losing trust in Ramsey Solutions was not an indictment of Nathan. When someone loses their trust in a healthy organization or leader, that place or person mourns that loss, engages in self-reflection, owns their mistakes, and works to regain that trust. Sadly, that wasn’t our experience.

It was right that Nathan should leave.

It was disappointing that they didn’t desire to regain Nathan’s trust. That is clearly their prerogative. They get to decide the rules of how their company operates.

After Nathan’s Resignation

Later, we discovered that a little over a week after Nathan’s last day at Ramsey Solutions, Dave stood in front of hundreds of current employees and mentioned that some team members had recently left over how the company had handled a situation. Dave indicated that these employees had heard some things they believed to be true. Dave said it was probably a good thing that they quit.

He was partially right. We did hear things we believed to be true. What he failed to communicate was that one of those things we believed to be true had been told to us by an executive board member.

Dave also said that if people didn’t have a backbone to come and ask what was going on, they should quit. This statement is perplexing. Nathan followed the protocols laid out at the organization. He went to his team leader and then met with two board members at their request. 

I’m proud of the courage and backbone Nathan exhibited in this situation.

Dave indicated to the team that the people who left were believing lies.

Nathan never believed any lies.

I’ve spent many tears and prayers trying to make sense of the fact that my husband and his leader had their backbone publicly questioned in front of hundreds of people. I’ve wondered since then if there was even one leader in that room who knew the truth and if they had the courage to say anything. Did they all sit quietly in that team meeting, afraid to say anything, knowing the way Dave was representing Nathan and others was not accurate?

Shortly after this team meeting occurred, an article was posted on the company website under Dave’s name. In it, he lamented about team members who were not loyal: “It’s sad how fast rats respond to an unproven, unconfirmed alarm and leave a ship they think might sink even though there are no signs of actual water.” I later learned this article was a repackaging of things Dave shared in that same staff meeting where he characterized the people who had left as believing lies.

For someone who teaches against gossip, it was ironic that he would stand up in front of the entire team and say such things.

A Catch-22

Ramsey team members considering leaving the organization can be caught in a catch-22. On the one hand, they are encouraged to quit if they can’t support the actions of the company and Dave, himself. Dave even encourages such people to leave, saying he won’t be mad. On the other hand, Dave is willing to characterize people like Nathan who leave under such circumstances as disloyal. This is a no-win situation.

I’m not sure what story you have heard, if any, about Nathan’s departure. When Nathan and I agreed it was time for him to resign, we did so based on the information shared with us by a board member and after praying for discernment.

Since that time, I’ve seen, with my own eyes, documents confirming the truth of the situation that caused us to decide to leave. What we found was inconsistent with the core values of Ramsey Solutions. It was clear confirmation that Nathan’s decision to leave was the right one.

Nathan and I are grateful for the years he was there. We treasure the friendships. The team leader that Nathan had during most of his years there was a blessing. Nathan was part of an amazing team. God has used this organization to do some wonderful things and bring hope to many. It broke our hearts to see some of the rot behind the curtain and that it appeared to go all the way to the top.

Last summer, as I was processing our painful exit, I listened to a podcast from Michael Hyatt. He shared about a difficult ethical situation he navigated while working in the publishing industry. The co-host chimed in to add, “. . . core values look good when they’re hanging on the wall. They are very difficult to enact in a real-life business situation.”

I cried as I listened. “Very difficult” felt like an understatement. Our core values are tested in these situations. In my journal, I wrote down one final quote from the podcast: “Err on the side of integrity, even if it costs you in the short term.”

I have to be honest, telling our story makes me anxious given that Dave’s previous responses to criticism have allegedly included firing people, calling people’s pastors, shaming people from the stage (this shaming being something Nathan observed), and even suing them. We have prayed over this situation and asked others to pray with us. After seeking the Lord, just as we did in Nathan’s decision to leave, we feel like the time is right to speak.

(edited to add this note on 1/13/21: Our fears turned out to be well-founded. In May of 2020, we were sent a C&D from the RS team that a lawyer we spoke with described as the legal equivalent of a bully saying, “Nice bike you have there. It would be a pity if something were to happen to it.” They threatened us with legal action and followed that up by setting up a meeting between the RS CTO and the leadership at my husband’s new place of employment. During that same time period, the RS leadership also gathered many of the current employees together to, once again, malign us.)

Over the years of Nathan’s employment there, he would regularly hear Dave talk about how God had blessed them. Dave added that if God’s blessing ever left, it wouldn’t be worth keeping the business open. How do we know if a company or a person is specifically being blessed by God? Would we even recognize it if God’s blessing left? I don’t know the answer, but over the last year, God has gently turned our focus from chasing a blessing to chasing Jesus. One of the ways that played out was in our decision to leave Ramsey Solutions. We are grateful for the way God used Nathan’s time there even though it ended painfully. And we are grateful for a faithful God who goes before us as we seek to continue to honor him wherever He may lead us.

*****

Podcast Episodes About Our Experience with Ramsey Solutions

Related: Is Dave Ramsey’s empire the ‘best place to work in America’? Say no and you’re out (religionnews.com)

The post Our Story of Leaving Ramsey Solutions appeared first on Amy Fritz.

“We swim in the cultural waters of narcissism, and churches are not immune.”- Chuck DeGroat

Last week I met up with some strangers I met on the internet.

This is not my typical MO, but I made an exception for these particular folks. I met them because we are all a part of the launch team for the book When Narcissism Comes to Church. We quickly learned there was a bunch of us in the Nashville area.

That’s how I found myself sitting at a restaurant talking with strangers about narcissism and spiritual abuse. And in the most Nashville fashion ever, a well-known country singer sat two tables away from us.

To my left sat a couple who had experienced such extreme abuse at their former church that they made the decision to move hundreds of miles away. Across the table, a woman confided with tears in her eyes how she was desperately trying to hold on to her faith. The woman on my right told her account of decades at a church that ended painfully.

We were all in different stages of healing. Some had tears. Others expressed anger, and one’s hands shook with fear as they told their story. Every one of them is precious to Jesus. I wish you could meet them. The next best option is to pick up When Narcissism Comes to Church. If you have experienced spiritual abuse, or if you care about those who have experienced it and want to learn more about creating a safe and healthy culture, I highly recommend this book.

This book, by author Chuck DeGroat, is educational, practical, and hopeful.

He tells of the types of systems that attract narcissism and the problems this creates in our faith communities. I highlighted much of the book, this quote is especially powerful: “Churches are particularly susceptible to a phenomenon called “collective narcissism.” in which the charismatic leader/follower relationship is understood as a given.” One of the most important realities DeGroat shares is how systems themselves can also become narcissistic. He says, “Structures are not necessarily to blame for narcissism, but particular structures do create an environment where narcissism can grow. unchallenged.”

“Narcissistic systems exist for themselves, even though their mission statements and theological beliefs may be filled with the language of service, selflessness, justice, and care. Those within the system find this contradiction exhausting. This is why many who get close to the epicenter of leadership either forfeit their integrity or resign.”- Chuck DeGroat

Reading this book will help you understand the inner life of a narcissistic leader. DeGroat also outlines the importance of recognizing and dealing with our own personal shadows– for our own health and for the benefit of those around us. He says, “Unless we become conscious of our unconscious, the ignored shadow and all it contains rules our lives, stifles freedom, and emerges destructively in our relationships with others.”

This isn’t a book that attacks pastors. This book is about how our current church culture attracts narcissists, how we can all tend toward narcissism and how we can create healthy cultures. There is a lot of work to be done, but I’m hopeful that books like this will help us move forward toward healthier communities.

You can grab your copy here. I bought two copies already

*****

Related posts:

Is Your Ministry Healthy?

What’s Wrong with Unconditional Loyalty?

The post Fighting Narcissism in the Church appeared first on Amy Fritz.

“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.”- Edward Murrow

On December 18, 2018, the chairman of the elder board at Harvest Bible Chapel posted this to their website, “We the elders of Harvest Bible Chapel, express our appreciation and unconditional support for our Senior Pastor, James MacDonald.” Two months later, MacDonald was fired after audio was released with his voice threatening to plant child porn on the computer of a critic. There had been reports of MacDonald’s abusive behavior for years. Unconditional loyalty had caused many to turn a blind eye until undeniable evidence was shared with the public.

Former pastor of Mars Hill Church, Mark Driscoll, once preached about his love of “blessed subtraction.” He said that there was a pile of dead bodies under the Mars Hill bus and that by God’s grace it would be a mountain by the time they were done. “Get on the bus or get run over.” Unconditional loyalty to Driscoll protected his position as pastor until undeniable evidence was shared with the public. Driscoll was fired in 2014.

Loyalty is a quality we admire. If you grew up in the Boy Scouts, you’ll recognize it as part of Scout Law. What happens, though, when we elevate the quality of loyalty in the church setting and equate it with faithfulness? What happens when a leader demands, or we offer willingly, unconditional loyalty?

If you were to give me a choice between a loyal friend and an unloyal one, I would choose the loyal one every time. Loyalty isn’t the issue. It’s the modifier that gets us in trouble. “Unconditional” loyalty is problematic.

So, what’s the difference between healthy loyalty and unhealthy loyalty?

Healthy loyalty gives reasonable benefit of the doubt. It starts by assuming the best. It cares for the person or institution. However, that loyalty does not preclude members from caring about pursuing the truth wherever that may lead.

Unhealthy loyalty is blind to weaknesses. It believes only positive reports. Protection is its goal. In an unhealthy system, loyalty is often not reciprocated.

We adopted our dog, Samantha, from a rescue a couple of months ago. She’s obsessed with me. I love that she adores me, but she expects all my attention in return. If I’m not paying enough attention, she’s likely to express her true feelings by leaving poop on the family room floor. I guess what I’m saying is that you know it’s toxic loyalty that’s being demanded by watching what happens when you don’t offer it. 

Toxic loyalty always leaves poop on the floor.

Ryan Ramsey wrote a long tweet-thread about loyalty and how it can become toxic. He says this: 

There are many churches that faithfully follow Jesus. I’m grateful to attend such a church. I pray it always stays that way. Part of the responsibility for that lies with me. Regular, honest introspection is one guardrail. I certainly don’t have “inherent goodness”.  These days I’ve been asking myself, “Where might I be wrong?” Am I making it a point to specifically confess when I’ve sinned? Am I owning my shortcomings?

This next part is equally important. Our beloved communities, led by people like you and me, are also not “inherently good.” We must be willing to entertain the idea that they can make missteps. You can love a place and recognize when it has failed. Healthy loyalty isn’t mutually exclusive of accountability.

I love my children. I don’t love them any less by being willing to believe they could make mistakes. I’m not protecting them by considering anyone who tells me something troubling to be a liar. The most loving thing I can do is verify the truth. I need to want the truth more than a particular outcome. Not acknowledging the truth doesn’t make the truth a lie. In some cases, healthy loyalty means we seek help to discover the truth. This is why we hear survivors of abuse often ask for independent investigations. 

Ryan Ramsey goes on to say,

Our oldest is in high school this year. When he received a disappointing grade, I encouraged him to talk to his teacher. I told him the difference between people who excel and those who flounder has to do with who asks for help. I urged him to ask his teacher what he did wrong. What was she looking for that he missed? The answer to this question will make him a better student.  A healthy student, mom, husband, CEO, friend, or pastor considers and welcomes necessary corrections. They are a gift. Similarly, the groups we are a part of must be willing to receive correction.

Any place that demands the unconditional loyalty of its members is not a safe place. Wade Mullen wrote about walls that prevent abuse survivors from telling their stories. “Some communities place such an emphasis on loyalty and submission to authority that people are conditioned to believe silence is spiritual. The community can turn against the survivor for betraying what they feel are higher and more important virtues.”  If we want our churches to be places of refuge and healing for the most vulnerable, we need to make sure we’re sending them the right message.

I believe it’s possible that misguided loyalty is one of the greatest threats to our Christian witness.

How can we avoid this? How can we be wise without being cynical? How can we be discerning without being judgmental?

I suggest healthy loyalty may look something like this:

Healthy loyalty embraces the truth over institutional protection.

We’re ultimately loyal to Jesus. Lore Wilbert has a print hanging in her home that says, “Fidelity to the Word of God and not an outcome.” We won’t go wrong taking a similar stance in regard to our faith communities. We should be about fidelity to Jesus and not a particular community. This puts loyalty in its proper place.

Elevate the good, but pay attention to weaknesses.

Celebrate what you love about your community. Show gratitude. At the same time consider what you can do to help make weak areas more healthy. Listen to those with little power. These people may be your most reliable truth-tellers because they have no power to protect.

A place marked with healthy loyalty is charitable toward those with different ideas.

They welcome dissenting views. In an institution where one leaves due to a disagreement, the institution that exhibits healthy loyalty will bless those who leave and not malign them. There is mourning over lost community. It isn’t celebrated. The bus doesn’t run over folks who raise concerns.

Healthy loyalty grows in places that exhibit humility.

Healthy loyalty allows space for questions. It’s okay to disagree. Arrogant institutions and leaders will be less likely to believe criticism meant to help them improve. Healthy communities know there is room for growth.

Churches and leaders who demand unconditional loyalty are often blind to their own shortcomings while demonizing the same things in others. They demand your trust while doing nothing to earn it. They break your trust and simultaneously shame you for not trusting them.

To give unconditional loyalty to any place or person denies the fact that we are all sinful. In faith communities, this undermines the very message we claim to be about. Do we actually believe that we are all imperfect?

Wade Mullen says this, “In spiritually abusive organizations, excessive charm quickly becomes excessive condemnation the moment loyalty is betrayed.”

Excessive condemnation sure smells like poop on the floor.

Now, where’s my dog?

P.S. If you haven’t already, go read the entire thread by Ryan Ramsey: here.

The post What’s Wrong With Unconditional Loyalty? appeared first on Amy Fritz.

Several months ago, I started wondering about the relationship between spiritual abuse (like someone might experience in a traditional church) and cults. Was there an overlap? One of the best ways to understand how a healthy ministry works is to look at the least healthy on the spectrum. A cult fits that “least healthy” metric perfectly. I picked up the book, Combating Cult Mind Control by Steven Hassan. He’s an ex-cult member of the Moonies and has studied cults extensively. I wanted to read what he had to say.

The timing was perfect. The book arrived just as I finished binge-listening to the Something Was Wrong podcast. The host hinted that the next season would be about a man who had been in the Jonestown cult. I finished the book this week just as news of the removal of Steve Timmis from his position as CEO of the Acts 29 organization was published in Christianity Today. As I read the article, it was impossible to miss the overlap between what I had just read and the spiritual abuse that was being alleged. 

After learning from many ex-cult members and studying the cults themselves, Steven Hassan formulated a model to describe cults. He calls it the BITE model: It includes  Behavior Control, Information Control, Thought Control, and Emotional Control.

Problems With The Acts 29 Organization

Here’s what I observed from Steve Hassan’s book and how it overlaps with the CT reporting. The text in the gray box is a summary of what I learned from Hassan’s book. The text in the blue box contains examples of things I observed from the CT article reporting on Acts 29 and Steve Timmis.

“There is such an emphasis on ‘vision’ that if you have issues with that then you are encouraged to leave.”- Michael Tinker, former member of Steve Timmis’ Acts 29 church.

The Difference Between a Healthy Group and A Cult

One of the things that became clear, as I read Hassan’s book was that one prominent difference between a cult and a healthy organization is that the cult requires you to buy into a worldview that is specific to their group. In religious cults, this looks like elevating the importance of the group’s dogma to the same level as Scripture. The extrabiblical rules are promoted as necessary to a flourishing life. 

This is sadly illustrated in ministries who have a worthy mission but whose leaders have resorted to using the tactics that fit the BITE model.  Any group is susceptible to this because it’s effective.

The Continuum

If you picture Jonestown or Scientology when you think of a cult, you’ll fail to recognize the many other groups that use what Hassan calls “undue influence”. Not every cult looks like Jonestown. Every organization falls somewhere on the continuum of healthy to unhealthy. Hassan writes about a continuum of influence.  At the one end, we find helpful influences and at the other end we find influence that is destructive.

Groups in the healthy range of the continuum are led by honest leaders. They are accountable and transparent. Their approach to leading respects the member’s individuality and free will. They welcome feedback. They don’t require you to adopt the group’s identity as your own. You get to keep your own identity.

Groups on the unhealthy spectrum have centralized power. There is little transparency. You must agree with their dogma completely and there is no room for criticism. Followers are often frightened and dependent.

“To go from being inside a highly relational, tight community to being considered an “ungospeled” and rebellious outsider can be traumatic. “We at one point thought it was easier to leave the country than the church.”- Ben Murphy, former member of Steve Timmis’, Acts 29 church.

Cult Characteristics in Christian Culture

I’m concerned that many churches are modeling themselves after the systems of ministries and churches that appear to be thriving based on exterior metrics. Meanwhile, internally, they have adopted many characteristics we see on the unhealthy side of the continuum.  The Acts 29 organization is a good example. It’s first leader, Mark Driscoll, was removed from his position of leadership in that organization for spiritually abusive behavior. Several years ago, 5 staff members were fired after bringing their concerns to the board. And we see it most recently in the allegations of spiritual abuse by Steve Timmis.  It’s legitimate to ask if this particular system is unhealthy.

So What?

Why should we care? What difference does it make if people are happy? Why is this a problem if people are finding God?

A ministry led by a leader who is unable to be questioned does not reflect what we see in Scripture. Modeling a way of leading that is contrary to Scripture is harmful. It’s unusual to see spiritual abuse happen in a vacuum. More often than not, in a place where you find a spiritually abusive leader, you find a system that has also been infected.

Kyle Howard has this to say about the spiritually abusive leader: “[They] no longer see ministry as a privilege and honor [they] are not worthy of and begin to see it as a vocation [they] are entitled to.”

The end results in disciples of the group leader/ministry and not disciples of Jesus. At some point, that leader will fail or leave. In these systems, we have a house of cards built around abusive leaders. It all falls apart when the leader is unmasked. When unconditional loyalty is placed in anyone/thing, people will protect that at all costs. (more on toxic loyalty in my next post) This gives too much power to the leader. It leaves the members vulnerable to abuse.

These systems leave a path of destruction. Former members limp away wounded. People leave questioning their value, their wisdom, and their faith. When former members refer to themselves as refugees and the local therapists see a steady stream of clients from these groups, there can be no denying there’s a problem.

I used to think I was too smart to join a cult. Now I know the truth. We join something else. Maybe we join a Bible study, a community group, a nonprofit, a dance group, a direct sales organization, or a ministry. Most of the time, we choose a relatively healthy place or we leave upon discovering it isn’t. But some of these unhealthy places are toxic in ways that make it difficult to see the truth and even more difficult to leave.

The post Is Your Christian Ministry Healthy? appeared first on Amy Fritz.