One of the most important spiritual gifts for church leaders is the gift of empathy for others, particularly those whom we lead. It’s important for leaders to be able to place themselves in other people’s shoes, so to speak, and to try to understand what they’re experiencing from their perspective. But having the gift of empathy for others is not all that is needed to lead a church (or any group) to become collectively more spiritually vital and healthy. Such leadership requires both a good knowledge of how change happens as well as the gift of patient determination.  

For example, most clergy I know have a pretty good idea of what a healthy Christian community looks like and acts like. But many of those same clergy are reluctant to lead the congregation to incarnate such communal practices and norms. Why is that? They’re rightly concerned that they might run afoul of individuals or groups within the parish who have a stake in maintaining an unhealthy status quo. In other words, people don’t want their turf messed with even if what they are doing is failing or ineffective. So, unhealthy practices around, for example, children’s Christian formation, or music in the liturgy, or a particular community ministry continue because attempts to change them are seen as attempts to take away the authority of the Sunday School teacher or the organist or community ministry coordinator.

Some of this leadership reluctance is based on a natural desire to avoid conflict. Conflict can be hard and unpleasant. Another part of the reluctance of leaders to make changes that would bring greater spiritual health to the congregation has to do with a misunderstanding about the nature of change. We often mistakenly think people don’t like change. That’s not true most of the time. People don’t dislike change, per se, but they will probably dislike any change they don’t understand or a change they had no say in. Also, if they cannot see the blessing the change could produce, they aren’t likely to even consider embracing it.

And that’s where the leader’s gift for empathy comes in. If the leader exercises genuine empathy for the people who are being asked to accept some change, then the change has a good chance of succeeding. But if those folk are treated as obstructionists, or saboteurs, or “standing in the way of the Gospel,” then they’re likely to dig in their heals and become real obstructionists or saboteurs. The one leading the change must consistently stay in the role as leader and not withdraw, listen to all the voices in the congregation, and retain empathy for the people who oppose or question the proposed change. And the leader must do all that while not allowing those folk to take over the agenda or control the emotional climate. That’s a lot for the leader to handle and it takes real skill and training to negotiate it all well.

This is why we in the Diocese of Georgia have put so much time, energy, and resources into training programs like the Church Development Institute, Emotional Intelligence, Human Relations, and Conflict Management training, and peer coaching. Church leaders today more than ever need these practical skills to lead effectively.

+Scott

 

eCrozier #142

Dr. Daniel Shapiro directs Harvard’s International Negotiation Program. The program researches issues related to “emotional and identity-based dimensions of regional conflict and terrorism.” When Dr. Shapiro addresses a context that will require some negotiated settlement between conflicting parties, he offers five Core Concerns that participants should take with them into the context every time. These Core Concerns are appropriate whether it be a context as simple as a disagreement between spouses or as complex as a cease-fire in a civil war (truth be told, I’ve never witnessed or experienced a “simple” disagreement between spouses, but I accept Dr. Shapiro’s point here).

His Core Concerns for people entering such conflict negotiation are:

(1) Appreciation – do you feel appreciated and do you appreciate the others who are in conflict with you?

(2) Autonomy – are you experiencing freedom to make your own choices without feeling coercion and are you respecting such freedom in others and not coercing them?

(3) Affiliation – Even in a conflict situation, the context has brought us together. Like it or not, we are affiliated in the here and now. Can we recognize the mutual stakes we have?

(4) Status – Conflicting parties may experience a power differential in the conflict. If the other’s status is not being respected, then the conflict is almost impossible to resolve.

(5) Role – do you have a feeling of being a part of the solution? Are you creating space for the others in the conflict to have that role as well?

These five Core Concerns strike me as being quite congruent with our own baptismal covenant as disciples of Jesus. “Respecting the dignity” of others, “striving for justice and peace,” and “loving our neighbors as ourselves” are all manifested in Dr. Shapiro’s Core Concerns as is Jesus’ so-called Golden Rule where we are commanded to do unto others as we would have them do unto us.

Our Church’s congregations are always in some level of conflict. Most of the time it is just minor stuff, but sometimes it gets quite heated with perceptibly high stakes. And, of course, we live in a culture and time where conflict seems to be more and more the currency of exchange. So, the issue is not conflict avoidance. That will not deal with it. It will just send it into dormancy until it pops up even worse.

No, the issue is how are we as ones who follow Jesus going to enter into and walk through conflicted situations together? Are we going to do it in a way that glorifies God and marks as Christ’s own or are we going to resort to the practices du jour that we see modeled in the larger culture?

I strongly urge each of us to take Dr. Shapiro’s Core Concerns to heart whenever we enter into even the smallest of conflicts. Those disagreeing with us, those who we may even call our enemies, must be respected and honored because a resolution to the conflict will not happen without them.

+Scott