Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Pagan
Dealing With Troublesome Leaders

Dealing With Troublesome Leaders

Last updated on: February 4, 2021 at 3:00 am by John Beckett

Dealing With Troublesome Leaders 2021-02-03T09:27:05-06:00 John Beckett

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

My most recent call for questions for Conversations Under the Oaks had barely gone up when I got four different requests to write on the topic of troublesome leaders in the Pagan community. I’m going to frame my response with a composite of all of the questions.

What can you do when you find out that one of your teachers or mentors is abusive, racist, TERFish, or has gone off the QAnon deep end? Can we still honor their earlier works or would that be hypocritical?

I’ll begin by saying this is a difficult, painful, complicated issue. If there was an easy answer, four intelligent and experienced Pagans wouldn’t be asking for my opinion. And at the end of the end of the day that’s all I can offer – my opinion, and the reasoning behind it.

This is personal for me. An influential leader I looked up to did terrible things. A one-time mentor is now a conspiracy-spouting Trump supporter. Someone I once considered a wise prophet denied the reality of the Covid pandemic and told people to “go have sex that day” instead of voting in the U.S. Presidential election.

So when these questions come up, I know exactly where they’re coming from, and I know how hard they are to deal with.

First, you grieve

It’s one thing when someone in another tradition, another religion, or another political party does something ethically unacceptable. They don’t directly affect you, so it’s easy to condemn them. In some cases you’re happy to condemn them.

It’s different when it’s your own.

If you didn’t see it coming, you feel betrayed. Or you feel like you missed something you should have caught. If you had hints it was coming, you wonder why you didn’t say or do anything before. You worry about the fallout for groups and traditions you’re a part of – how damaging will this be for them, and for you? In some cases you’ve lost a friend. If you speak up you may lose more friends.

Particularly in the case of sexual misconduct, there are often other victims with far worse injuries than yours. Certainly, they deserve first priority. But that doesn’t mean your suffering and loss isn’t real, because it is.

It’s not only OK to grieve this loss, it’s essential that you do.

But then we have to decide what to do about it.

Prevent further harm

If someone is being abusive they must be constrained from causing further harm.

In an organization they can be removed from positions of power, suspended, expelled, or all of the above. If criminal acts have taken place, you may need to contact civil authorities. I’m very reluctant to involve the police with anything, but that may be necessary to prevent further harm… and rapists belong in jail.

In other situations, the only recourse is sunlight – make sure everyone knows what they’ve done so they can be avoided, or at least, so they’ll be less likely to be able to scam and abuse the innocent.

Isolating harmful ideas and the limits of purity

Things get more complicated when the problem isn’t harmful actions but spreading harmful ideas. I’m all for deplatforming Nazis, but I find much of the current efforts around “canceling” and “shunning” to be ultimately unhelpful.

I will gladly work with Catholics on economic justice and to end the death penalty. And I will just as gladly turn around and oppose those same Catholics on reproductive rights. I hold little hope that my presence will cause them to change their opinions. But the need for economic justice and to end the death penalty is great, and we need allies where ever we can find them – even conditional allies.

There is a personal element to this. I have no history with the Catholic church. I find it much harder to work with Baptists (on say, disaster relief) because I grew up in the Baptist church and being in that environment is stressful for me. Other people have similar problems with groups and individuals that I don’t.

This is complicated. There is an ethical element, a practical element, and a personal element. There is a fine line between trying to isolate harmful ideas and demanding orthodoxy. Ultimately, you must decide for yourself.

That doesn’t mean any decision is a good decision. I will not work with the Westboro Baptist Church or the Asatru Folk Assembly on anything for any reason. They’re not the only ones on that list.

It means you have to think through each situation and then do what you think is best, with the understanding that people you like and respect may choose a different approach.

Can we separate the message from the messenger?

We don’t want to support people who do bad things, or who promote harmful ideas. That’s simple enough. But what if they wrote some really good books, or made some really good art? What if their work was very helpful to you before all this came to light?

Can we separate the message from the messenger? Can we separate the art from the artist?

Can we?

I can’t listen to “Herne the Hunter” anymore. That’s not a won’t it’s a can’t. I have no problem watching Roman Polanski’s movies. What’s the difference? I don’t know.

What can you separate?

Conditional and qualified recommendations

There are books I used to actively promote (because I thought they were that good, not because I got anything for promoting them) that I now will only recommend in private, so I can explain “this book by this author is good – this other book they wrote is not.” Or so I can say “this author is now espousing conspiracy theories – be cautious of following them too far.”

There are other books I’ve recommended in the past I will no longer recommend at all, because as good as the work is, the author has virtually no redeeming qualities. They’re not wrong on one or two issues, they’re wrong pretty much anywhere it matters.

I have no use for purity. That said, the idea that certain works are tainted by their author’s misdeeds has some merit. Did harmful ideas make their way into their works, subtly if not explicitly? “Blood and soil” runs through some otherwise-useful books on Heathenry. That’s reason enough to avoid them. I’m taking another look at some books by authors who have gone in troublesome directions – I think the roots of their descent into conspiracy may have been there all along. If so, I’ll move them from “recommend with reservations” to “do not recommend.”

I will never get rid of their books. I just don’t do that – ever, for any reason.

Traditions can be reformed – sometimes

One of the questions asked how we should “approach a tradition if you find the founder or a person in a key position of long term leadership is seriously problematic.”

I think it’s unhelpful – and possibly unethical – to abandon an organization or tradition when troubling news arises about their founders or leaders. No human organization is without flaws, and groups that are meaningful to their members deserve our sincere effort to cleanse and reform them when necessary.

But that obligation is not unlimited. If other leaders show no interest in removing problematic people, or if the problematic person has a cultish sway over a large portion of the membership, the organization may be beyond saving. We have no obligation to remain in a toxic environment.

Acknowledging history and paying honor are two different things

The uproar over removing Confederate monuments showed that many people don’t understand the difference between acknowledging historical realities and honoring people who did bad things – and in many cases, honoring them specifically for the bad things they did.

We need not and should not rewrite history (to the extent that our history is factually accurate, which is always a challenge). At the same time, we can acknowledge that certain works and institutions have value and also acknowledge that their founders are problematic.

As I was starting work on this post, I came across this tweet promoting “The Post-Thelemic Manifesto.” It attempts to separate the work began by Aleister Crowley from “slavish servitude to the man Crowley.” I’m not a Thelemite and I know nothing of the organization that issued this manifesto. But on its surface this is exactly what I’m talking about here. To call Crowley “problematic” would be generous – he was racist, misogynistic, and an egomaniac. But what he built continues to be meaningful and helpful to many people. There is no need to abandon that. Simply remove Crowley from his throne and move on with what works.

Don’t obsess over consistency

I occasionally run into people who say “if you object to X then you must also object to Y.”

No, I don’t.

Some years ago, football coach Bill Parcells was interviewed about his treatment of a particular player. After he answered, the reporter asked if that was consistent with how he treated other players. Parcells answer was “I’m not interested in being consistent. I’m interested in being right.”

Or, to quote a slightly different source – Ralph Waldo Emerson – “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” I have no patience with demands for purity, and I find that people who scream “hypocrisy!” usually do so because they’re unable to make a substantive argument against whatever it is they’re ranting about. They ignore the fact that while different cases may have similarities, they also have differences – differences that often demand a different response.

Be faithful to your values. Judge each case on its own merits. Gather the best and most complete information you can. Understand that whatever you do is likely to be painful in one way or another.

So is doing nothing.

Then make the best decision you can, with the realization that other people of good will may look at the same situation and come to a different conclusion.

May the Gods bless you with wisdom for the difficult decisions you and all of us must make.

Previous Post

February 2, 2021

QAnon and the Great Disappointment of 1844

Next Post

February 7, 2021 Fighting Imposter Syndrome as a Pagan

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Books Community CUUPS Druidry Foundations and Context Gods and Goddesses Magic Myth Nature Ritual Spiritual Practice Theology Travel Uncategorized Videos

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who wrote Lamentations, mourning Jerusalem's destruction?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Obadiah Ezra Jeremiah Isaiah