Lessons I have learned in working with church conflict

 

After many years of working with churches that find themselves in conflictual situations, I have concluded that there are six non-negotiable principles for a successful outcome.

First, an outside facilitator is usually necessary. The nature of conflict is that people take sides so it becomes very difficult for anyone from within to play the role of a neutral mediator. In fact, the larger the conflict the more critical it is that the individual you bring in is trusted by both sides to have the best interests of the church at heart. The sooner you bring someone in when it is clear that the situation is dangerous the better.

Second, the issues that are fueling the conflict need to be brought into the light. Conflict thrives in the shadows, in gossip, in cliques, in assumptions and behind the scenes. Bringing all the competing agendas, attitudes and positions into the light and allowing all members of the congregation to understand what is being said, what is happening and what the issues are takes the mystique out of the situation and allows everyone to respond from a position of knowledge. It also removes the power of those who have an agenda but have not been willing to make it public but have instead been putting on pressure from behind the scenes. Getting everything on the table allows all stakeholders to understand what is going on and to have a voice in solving the issues. Ironically, those who are most vociferous in their opinions overplay those who agree with them when in fact, if all facts were known, the majority would not agree. 

Third. Reconciliation is always preferable to disunity. This is actually a hard concept for many who have taken a position in church conflict. First, our natural tendency is to take a hard line and once we have told others about our own line-in-the-sand it is humbling to change our position. Second, the longer conflict goes on, the more we see the members of the opposing side as evil, dishonest, disingenuous, people with bad motives and once we demonize people it is hard to ever think that reconciliation is possible. 

To not be willing to consider reconciliation is to make a mockery of God's reconciliation with us and His call for us to be reconcilers. Speaking of church conflict, this is what Paul had to say to the Corinthians. "I appeal to you brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought (1 Corinthians 1:10)." 

In Ephesians 4:1-6 Paul writes, "As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit - just as you were called to one hope when you were called - one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." Having said that, I acknowledge that sometimes it is not going to be possible to reconcile and stay together. Sometimes it means that we part ways and speak well of one another.

Fourth, ground rules need to be established. One of the most incendiary fuels in all conflict is the absence of ground rules - what is acceptable and what is not. For a list of the ground rules that I recommend, see my blog, Negotiating church conflict in a healthy manner. Or if you want to keep it very simple, look back at the passage in Ephesians 4:1-6 where he says be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace. When you think about it, these characteristics are almost always lacking when conflict is taking place. What gets in our way? Pride, wanting to get our own way, anger, and our emotions.

Five, you probably will not convince everyone. There are people who don't want to reconcile. There are people whose pride is far greater than their humility and they have no desire to seek a win/win solution. In working with churches in conflict, I don't do very much to try to convince the unconvincible even if they have the loudest voices. I am looking for people of peace and reason who are willing to work together to see the church come together in unity. This does not mean that the issues that have caused disunity are swept under the rug. To the contrary, as principle two states, they are all on the table and those that need to be addressed are addressed. To do that successfully, however, it requires men and women of peace and reason, whose personal agendas do not cloud their emotions.

Who is most likely to leave in church conflict? Those who have taken a hard stand and cannot or will not compromise that stand. Frankly, it is good for them to leave because they will simply contribute to ongoing conflict if they are not willing to come together with the rest of the congregation.

Sixth: It is a process. Church conflict does not start overnight and it does not get settled overnight. It may take a year in some cases to bring the church back to health. The benefits of doing so far outweigh the trauma of either a church split (which damages churches for years to come) a powerplay by a faction in the church (which causes huge trauma to a church and a significant lack of trust) or not dealing with it at all which dooms the church to later issues.

What is needed for a healthy process is a willingness of the congregation to work together recognizing that how they handle their differences will either enhance or diminish the reputation of Jesus. If His reputation is at stake - and it is - I will do all I can to enhance it.

Additional blogs on church conflict:

Negotiating church conflict in a healthy manner

8 Reasons in my experience that churches experience major conflict

Church conflict: Finding the core issue and the common source

Seven things to understand about church conflict

Church conflict, christian character and the reputation of Jesus

Why the minority voice often wins on church boards and within congregations and what to do about it

It is very frustrating to those that make up the majority when a minority voice is able to determine the outcome of church issues. This can take place at the board level or within congregations, even when the polity is one where the majority should be able to move forward. Unfortunately, it is all too common, and church leaders often allow it to happen. In my experience, there are a number of tactics that are used to manipulate a larger group by a minority group.

One. Our voices will be loud, and we will therefore give the impression that we are many. This works well behind the scenes when there is conflict over a decision and in congregational meetings where loud voices often rule the day. 

Two. We will declare that many agree with us with the implication that if you try to move forward, you will "split the church" or cause "serious conflict and division." Now I have done a great deal of conflict resolution in churches, and I have never encountered a situation where this was actually true. I have seen pastors and boards try to push things through when a majority were dissenting (it was not pretty), but when a few voices declare that there are many with them, I am often skeptical. However, this tactic often works because leaders and congregations don't want to cause undo conflict, so they back off with only the word of a few that they actually have strong support.

Three. If you move forward with that decision, we will leave. So let's call that for what it is: congregational blackmail! Since it is considered wrong to "push people out of a church," this threat is used against the majority because the minority can claim that they were indeed pushed out. What actually happened was that the minority simply chose to leave because they didn't desire to stay. 

This is often a threat that works, but it is nothing less than congregational blackmail. The same can be said for those who declare that if you move forward, they will withhold their funding. That is financial blackmail. All threats no matter what they are, by a minority voice to block the majority should be considered blackmail and should be called exactly that - in public where appropriate.

Four. If you move forward, there will be a lot of people who will be angry. Given what I said in one and two, it is unlikely that a lot of people will be angry. Also, any time you make any decisions in a church, someone is likely to disagree, but if that is the criteria by which we make decisions, no decisions would be made. While this strikes fear in many congregants, it is emotional blackmail by those using the tactic.

One of the fundamental reasons that all these threats work is that most people are conflict resistant. They don't want to have to negotiate conflict, they are afraid of conflict, and they especially don't like conflicts in the church with people they know. Unless leaders understand this and speak to it, such threats often work to the chagrin of the majority of the congregation or board. Fear keeps leaders and congregations from moving forward in the face of threats. 

So how do you counter these tactics? Especially when you have an entrenched individual or group where dialogue and reasoning has not done anything to change their minds?

First, I would suggest that you look at the tactics of the minority group and ask whether they fit any of the scenarios above. Perhaps I have missed something but be willing to name the tactic that is being used for what it is. Explain to the individual or group involved that their tactics are not fair or honest and see if reasoning will change their behaviors.

Second, if reasoning fails, which it often will, I would encourage the board or leadership to share with the congregation what they believe to be true. That you believe this is a minority view, that you have tried to reason with them, and that you believe that for the good of the ministry, the church needs to move forward. It is possible to say these things in a way that does not disparage but does speak the truth. If leaders are cowed, the congregation will be as well. If leaders are courageous and forthright, the congregation is likely to follow. 

Third, if this is a significant decision and there is no clarity on what is actually happening, bring in a third party to ascertain what is really going on. It is not hard for a disinterested and experienced third party to evaluate the situation and determine the actual facts rather than hearsay. 

Finally, in all of these discussions, remember that what is at stake is the health and effectiveness of the Body of Christ, The Bride. Don't compromise the work of God out of fear! 

TJ Addington (Addington Consulting) has a passion to help individuals and organizations maximize their impact and go to the next level of effectiveness. He can be reached at tjaddington@gmail.com.

"Creating cultures of organizational excellence."