All congregational leaders need to learn how not to fall into the trap of escalating conflict unnecessarily. Too many pastors, staff ministers, and laypersons do this. An earlier factor focused on their patterns. Let’s focus in this post on lay leaders.
A key issue for lay leaders is that they tend to bring into the dynamics of the congregation things going on with them outside the congregation. Some of these are personal or family related. Some of these are related to their employment or career. Some are related to politics and culture. In these arenas they may or may not be in charge or in control of their destiny. But, in their congregation they believe they can impact the direction.
Many times lay leaders have issues in their family with parents, children, and grandchildren. They want their congregation to be a place that is attractive and caring for all their family members. When it is not they become demanding as to what they think needs to happen. If the pastor, staff, and programs of the congregation are giving what the lay leaders see as appropriate attention to their extended family then they are happy. If they do not they are not.
Too often lay leaders want to control what is happening in their congregation rather than empower what is happening. This is particularly true for lay leaders who have been connected with the congregation for 20 years or more. In their earlier life they worked hard to help build the congregation. Now it is either declining in attendance, or changing because of the desires and needs of newer members who also may be younger. Change is tough. Longer-tenured members like the recognizable patterns of congregation life that have been established. Even if the changes are needed for the future vitality and vibrancy of the congregation, and to reach the next generation of people, longer-tenured people often oppose them.
As long as their opposition is over style and program patterns, it can generally be healthy conflict. However, once it begins focusing around theology and the core ideology of the congregation, then emotion kicks in and lay leaders see themselves as defenders of the faith. In addition, lay leaders seldom want to have a Christ-centered solution that involves discernment. They prefer a culture-centered solution that involves voting that creates winners and losers. This latter perspective is guaranteed to escalate conflict to an unhealthy intensity.
Overreaction is the enemy of congregations. Taking a single issue and expanding it to cover a multitude of issues says a lot more about the person who escalates the conflict than it does about the people being accused. The manner of expression of some lay leaders becomes so intense they detract from the real issues and focus the conflict around themselves. When they do this they must be separated from the conflict mediation process. They are no longer helpful even if their perspective is good and even the right one. Their manner of expression had invalidated their concerns.
What conflict ministry education efforts is your congregation attempting to help people learn how not to escalate conflict?
Copyright 2009, Rev. George Bullard, D.Min.
