Congregations should learn how to embrace diversity of viewpoints, theology, culture, socioeconomics, birth generations, and tenure consistent with their core ideology. A decreasing number of congregations are composed of people with just one dominant viewpoint. For example, many congregations were once composed of a majority of people who had only been connected with churches affiliated with one denomination for their entire lives. Now congregations are composed of people of up to a dozen denominational backgrounds, and may not always have a majority who come from the denomination of the congregation’s historic affiliation.
If there is a majority denominational heritage represented in congregations, it is generally made possible by a super majority of people who have been connected with the congregation more than ten years who come from a single denominational heritage. Newer people tend to come from various denominational backgrounds and no one denominational heritage is a majority. This is one perspective on how conflict can increase between people with long-tenure and those with short-tenure in congregations.
People with a diversity of denominational backgrounds will bring varying perspectives on theology, worship styles, ethical issues, governance practices, program expectations, and a plethora of other issues. Each degree of diversity represents an opportunity to be in transitional to unhealthy conflict within congregations if they have not developed patterns for embracing diversity that is consistent with their core ideology. As a reminder, core ideology is composed of an understanding of eternal mission, everlasting purpose, enduring core values, and empowering vision.
Consistency with core ideology means standards for congregational practice do exist. However, in congregations who embrace a diversity of viewpoints these standards are a centering or moorings for the congregation, and not a box where only fully correct viewpoints fit. Congregations who are centered will tend to embrace a diversity of viewpoints. Congregations who are boxed will tend to abhor a diversity of viewpoints.
Congregations who require harmony in all areas will be disrupted by diversity and experience unhealthy conflict. They will focus on what is right rather than what is good. They will focus on judgment more than love. At the same time this does not mean congregations who embrace a diversity of viewpoints lack focus. They may be highly focused by their core ideology, and clearly on mission in their activities. They are simply willing to dialogue to understand the viewpoints various people present rather than to debate or diminish the viewpoints of others. They are willing for God to speak to them anew through a process of discernment rather than to defend the ways things have always been.
To handle diversity congregations need to learn the art of dialogue rather than the science of discussion and debate. North America appears hopelessly stuck in a discussion and debate era where two opposing viewpoints are frequently championed. More time is spent talking about what is wrong with the viewpoint of people who do not see things the way you see them rather than dialogue around principles that may help congregations move forward with consensus out of spiritual discernment.
