Pastoring Chloe's people: pathology and ministry strategies for conflicted congregations.

While the global community struggles with the possible threat of bird flu, we in the Christian church are facing the reality of a pandemic already infecting congregations all around the world: congregational conflict. Such conflict knows no denominational, cultural, or national boundaries. American authors are using such terms as "clergy killers," "pathological antagonist," "abused clergy," "collateral damage," "firestorms," and "the illusion of congregational happiness" to describe it.

It is an old phenomenon that has escalated to major proportions. In Paul's first and second letters to his Corinthian congregation we read about Chloe's people reporting to her and to Paul the eruption of conflict in the church he had founded. Gordon D. Fee adds background on the church fight. (1) It seems that Chloe was a wealthy Asian woman whose business interests caused those who represented her to go between Ephesus and Corinth. Evidently some had become Christians and were members of the Ephesus church. So, while in Corinth on business, they visited there, and upon their return to Ephesus they had given Paul an earful as to the real situation (1 Cor 1:10-17)--quarreling in the church.

Paul was probably blindsided with this information about the nature of the opposition and the kind of thinking that lay behind it. Verse 12 tells us that congregants had chosen up sides over to whom they would be loyal--Paul, Apollos, Cephas, or Christ. The quarrels seem to have been generated in the names of their various leaders, although it is unlikely that the leaders themselves were party to it. The problem was division over leadership.

Later Paul calls these troublemakers in this church "false apostles, deceitful workers disguising themselves as apostles of Christ" (2 Cor 11:13).

Antagonists in the church

Kenneth C. Haugk in his book Antagonists in the Church identifies these instruments of the power that works against God as "individuals who, on the basis of nonsubstantive evidence, go out of their way to make insatiable demands, usually attacking the person or performance of others. These attacks are selfish in nature, tearing down rather than building up, and are frequently directed against those in leadership capacity." He divides them into three separate groups: "hardcore, major and moderate." (2) "Hardcore" antagonists are frequently paranoid and always disturbed individuals. Paul refers to them in Acts 20:28-29. The "major" antagonists refuse to listen to reason. "Moderate" antagonists are not quite so threatening because they do not have the courage to start trouble on their own or the tenacity to keep it going. (3)

Not all conflict in the congregation is unhealthy, of course. There are many disagreements about the mission and message of the gospel. As long as congregations are made up of sinners and imperfect persons, that sin will manifest itself.

In Western culture, church people have been hammering away at the doctrine of "the priesthood of all believers" and that all the baptized should be "empowered" for their ministry. However, empowering without instructing and discipling results in congregations with groups of uninformed members, ignorant in ecclesiology, having power without skill and knowledge. Building loyalty to the church rather than to Christ is another sure recipe for conflict, as is ineffective church structure. Sometimes troublemakers are attracted to the church as a safe place to act out bizarre or even abusive behavior, and misguided and otherwise passive members in the congregation may join in supporting them.

Haugk's five levels of church conflict, gleaned from Speed Leas, are helpful as we try to diagnose the seriousness of a situation and find a remedy: "1) Problems to solve. 2) Disagreements. 3) Contest. 4) Fight/flight. 5) Intractable situations." (4) The first three can be successfully addressed, and peace can be restored; not so for the last two.

1. In "problems to solve" the communication is still open and the focus is not on the individual. There is no hidden agenda.

2. With "disagreements" the elements of self-protection and generalizations come into the conflict. Sometimes these situations can have win/win solutions.

3. In a "contest" case the conflict becomes much more difficult to manage. The element of someone winning and someone losing enters the scenario. The objective of solving the problem often is replaced with getting back at the opposition.

4. "Fight/flight" gets vindictive and mean and becomes impossible. The good of the congregation is replaced with punishing those who are "wrong." The choice is set in concrete: Win or leave.

5. "Intractable situations" is what Leas calls "conflict gone amok." (5) The antagonists must destroy their enemies no matter how it hurts them or the congregation.

Church constitutions are rarely helpful

Most churches have included in their constitutions a method for dealing with conflict and with the discipline of members. Almost all quote Matthew 18:15-17, which calls for three steps: (1) point out the faults privately, (2) take one or two with you as witnesses, and (3) tell it to the church. If these do not work, the constitution usually calls for removal from membership.

I have found these recommended steps ineffective in cases involving hardcore troublemakers with often clinical mental pathologies of paranoia or antisocial behavior that lead to manipulative scheming. The personality characteristics that cause the troublemaker to behave in the disruptive ways listed by Haugk would further indicate that these steps in Matthew are not sufficient to solve such problems. He lists "negative self-concept, narcissism, aggression, rigidity and authoritarianism." (6)

Ron Susek takes a different approach in his book Firestorm: Preventing and Overcoming Church Conflicts. (7) He claims that we all have certain psychosocial needs and that when they are denied or improperly fulfilled we become dysfunctional in our relationships. He maintains, like Abraham Maslow in his hierarchy-of-needs theory, that we seek to meet these needs in different ways at various stages of our lives but that we do continue to try to satisfy them:

Acceptance. We all want to be accepted into a group. If troublemakers do not achieve this, they stir up trouble to gain acceptance and attention.

A sense of personal achievement. There is a basic drive to achieve something satisfying. If we do not, Susek says, we will likely ignite a firestorm in the congregation (see Phil 4:11-13). Perhaps this element was missing among Chloe's people and maybe in Paul's ministry.

A sense of value to a group. This can be the motivation for giving time and money to a ministry and needs to be rewarded.

A sense of safety. If we always must prove ourselves and are worried about being discarded, we will not function well and probably will launch an attack.

A sense of destiny. We all need to feel that we are making progress, heading somewhere.

Susek states, "Danger lurks when you are frustrated in one or more of these areas. When people fail and your position is not fulfilling, your destructive behavior may surprise even you!" (8)

When considering what Chloe's people were reporting to Paul, I wonder what kind of family background these people had. Family background can profoundly affect present behavior. Family-systems theory and behaviorist psychologists would probably list conditions such as broken homes; verbal, emotional, physical, or sexual abuse; enmeshment; overbearing father or controlling mother; rejection; triangulation; and displaced anger.

Triangulation and displaced anger, together with hidden agendas, are most often at the heart of destructive congregational conflict. In many arenas we cannot safely express our anger--at our job or with our spouse, parents, or relatives--so we may suppress our anger until we get to church, where "Turn the other cheek," "Love your enemies," and "Be kind to one another" are preached and ought to be practiced.

Triangularized relationships appear quickly when there is congregational conflict, usually with two partners against a third person. Or a conflict of two will draw in a third. This, according to David Augsburger, is "as old as human communication. In the Hebrew story of Adam and Eve, it is the first response to conflict. In stress, a third party is drawn in to release tension by providing support for either one party or for both persons (a more constructive option)." (9)

When we are threatened, our behavior may turn mean and vindictive. Hidden agendas are major causes of congregational conflict and are driven by factors such as bias, fear, bitterness, pride, lust, and plain selfishness.

Sources of congregational conflict

Let us turn to some of the basic causes for conflict in congregations and what Chloe's people might have suggested to those in Corinth about whom they were reporting, like the household of Stephanas (see 1 Cor 1:16).

Roy W. Pneuman gives us nine common indicators in congregations who have severe conflict:

1. People disagree about values and beliefs. Congregants disagree about what the church is and what it ought to be about.

2. The structure of the congregation is unclear.

3. The pastor's role and responsibilities are conflictual.

4. The stated structure no longer fits the empirical congregation.

5. The clergy and parish leadership styles do not match.

6. A new pastor rushes into change.

7. Communication lines are blocked.

8. Church people manage conflict poorly.

9. Disaffected members hold back participation and pledges. (10)

I want now to expand on each one and give some suggestions of how one might guard against these factors causing conflict among Chloe's people and ours.

When people differ about values and beliefs, they have different opinions about what is important in ministry in a given community and congregation. This often can be prevented by a participatory process of drawing up a short, concise mission statement to which all can agree and to which the leadership can refer in setting goals, priorities, and spending plans. A warning, however: The statement is only as valuable as the broad participation in forming it and the consistent and persistent holding of the statement before the entire congregation.

Often the structure of a congregation is unclear because it is seldom referred to explicitly except when trouble is brewing. A written job description listing the responsibilities for all leaders is a must. The committee chairs, governing board, elders, assistant clergy and laity, secretaries and staff should have this mutually agreed upon job description before beginning their position, whether volunteer or salaried. And as the church grows the structure needs to expand along with it.

A prevalent cause of conflict is the expectations put upon the pastor by various leaders and congregational members who have come from differing church backgrounds with wholesome and unwholesome experiences. I recommend having a Pastoral Relations, or Mutual Ministry, or Minister's Advisory Committee. Whatever its name, this carefully chosen committee functions as a sounding board, advice giver, and support group for the pastor. Committee members must know how to keep confidences and have the respect of both the congregation members and the governing board. The drawing up of a ministry priority index upon the arrival of a new pastor, after consulting as many members as possible, can serve as an early task for this group to bond them with the pastor.

The size of a congregation also may be a source of trouble. If the membership is rapidly shrinking or growing, it may find that its structure is no longer a fit with the congregational size. This is a good reason to keep most of the operating rules in the bylaws rather than in the congregational constitution. Bylaws can be amended more easily to conform to the new reality of the congregation and its ministry.

Congregational leaders' and pastors' leadership styles vary widely. Call committees are notorious for selecting the opposite style in a succeeding pastor. This exacerbates the problem as he or she tries to work with leadership selected and groomed by the former clergy. If the style of a former long-term pastor has strongly impacted the present leadership or the entire congregation, conflict is certain to develop.

There are good and bad ways of implementing needed change. It is important for a new pastor to carefully explain the reason and need for change while showing profound respect for the traditions, history, and emotional investments of the congregation. No matter how badly needed, changes usually are better instituted after some time is invested in getting to know the congregation, earning their trust and the involvement of many of the stakeholders in the decision-making process. Only rarely can changes be effectively made during the honeymoon period of a new pastorate.

Pneuman writes, "Communication lines are more often blocked as a result of conflict rather than a cause of conflict." (11) This means that we ought to take deliberate measures to keep the lines open through congregational forums, board meetings open to all, minutes displayed for all to read, and a well-distributed newsletter describing the mission, activities, and deliberations of the parish. Also, one-on-one meetings of the pastor with the elected leadership and the nonelected leadership (sometimes described as "permission with-holders") can prevent blocked lines of communication.

Because church members often manage conflict poorly, addressing conflict needs to be taught as a subject in adult forums and study groups before it is a crisis in the congregation. Conflict is inevitable, and we must not deny it, but we must learn to deal with it constructively.

Severe destructive conflict almost always degenerates into a battle over money. Therefore, we must have an agreed-upon spending plan/budget and a process for revision of the plan as the availability of resources changes. When we are conflict free, we need to preach and teach a stewardship that places financial giving on a whole different motivation than paying for the church's program if we like it and withholding our offerings if we do not.

Resolving conflict

Augsburger describes various options for handling conflict, viewed on a continuum.

Avoidance. Conflict is handled by denying its existence.

Repression. Open conflict is avoided by explicit action to punish or suppress its expression.

Displacement. Conflict is avoided by projecting a part or the whole onto another party or to a different issue with the same party.

Management. Conflict is directed in a limited or sequential manner or with diminished intensity by mutual agreement.

Resolution. Conflict is terminated by changes that alter its causes or modify its driving forces.

Utilization. Conflict is used not only to achieve a new integration of goals and values but to effect creative change in the system itself. (12)

Chloe's people were trying to use the displacement method, but Paul, through his letter to them, was practicing resolution methodology.

Augsburger quotes Roger Fisher and William Ury in their book Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (Penguin, 1991) as a model of conflict mediation process based on Western values which I find extremely helpful: "1) Focus on interests, not on positions. 2) Separate people from the problem. 3) Invent options for mutual gain. 4) Insist on using objective criteria." (13)

Moving away from positions that persons or groups of people hold to considering their interests will sometimes unblock conversations. These, in turn, may soften their positions.

As mediators we must work on the problem faced, not on the people espousing it. The relationships and the essential nature of the struggle have to be dealt with separately.

Inventing options means constructing the solution so that all win something. This means we separate brainstorming possible solutions from selecting the best solution. And we do our best to prevent judgments about the value of the options until we have all of them expressed and recorded.

The best solutions are not arrived at by taking a power position and then bargaining from it (often corporate management's way of dealing with differences). Treating everyone equally and objectively with just results for all will serve the mission of God's people, and Chloe's, much better.

The concept of saving face

I have served as a practical theologian in Asia for nine years, and when I write about conflict management in this context I must consider the strong factor of "face." The avoidance of conflict in most Asian cultures takes place under the high value placed on harmony and public conformity. David Ho writes.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The importance of extending due regard for the face of others can hardly
be over emphasized in Chinese social intercourse. To be careful about
not hurting someone's face is not simply a matter of being kind or
considerate; it functions to avoid conflict, or, more precisely, to
avoid confrontation or bringing conflict out into the open. This
conflict avoidance is a basic orientation in Chinese social processes
rooted in the Confucian model of society based on the maintenance of
harmony in interpersonal relations. (14)

A model of solving conflict in the Asian context might proceed something like this: (1) Disconnect the conflicted participants; (2) Hear each of them while they are separated; (3) Cool the emotive feelings; (4) Resolve the dispute; (5) Check later to see if what they agreed upon is holding; (6) Provide continued pastoral care and counseling.

This may seem acceptable, but I am not convinced of its effectiveness over the long term. Because the traditional Asian model of managing conflict calls for saving face for both parties in conflict, this can lead to conflict avoidance with no genuine resolution to the problems. This can lead to conflicts taking on a violent form when they eventually break out into the open.

Steps to conflict resolution

Dudley Weeks suggests a number of approaches to conflict resolution: "the conquest approach; the avoidance approach; and the role playing approach." (15) He then recommends what he labels "the conflict-partnership pathway to effective conflict resolution."

1. Create an effective atmosphere. Paul, Apollos, Cephas, and all of Chloe's people, including even Crispus and Gaius, might have benefited from this healthy process (1 Cor 1:14).

2. Clarify perceptions. Perhaps the rumors and reports received by Paul varied. And Paul's idea of the conflict may have differed widely from that of Apollos, Cephas, or even Chloe herself. And when Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Archaicus arrived, there would be three more perceptions for Paul to clarify.

3. Focus on individual and shared needs. It is important to gain an understanding as to what the real needs of each participant in the conflict are. Knowing Maslow's hierarchy-of-needs psychological theory will help us determine the way through the conflict.

4. Build shared positive power. Here is where our Christian beliefs come into play. Taking seriously the work of the Holy Spirit makes a huge difference as we attempt to implement this step. With God's inspiration, fervent prayer, and skillful group dynamics empowered by the Spirit, all can gain a sense of the possible and begin to acquire a "taste" of God's guidance and presence in conflict management.

5. Look to the future and then learn from the past. Before commiserating on the painful past, congruent with behaviorist psychology, we ask here the "miracle question": If you wake up tomorrow and the conflict has disappeared, how will you know it? So we try to bring a vision to the conflicted of what it could be like in the future when the conflict is resolved. Only then should we turn to the past and mine healthy learnings from what has unfortunately taken place.

6. Generate options. In this step we brainstorm options in a nonthreatening manner without making any judgments as to their workability or acceptance by all of the conflicted parties. It is important to insist that no one express likes or dislikes of the expressed options at this stage. We simply get them out for all to see.

7. Develop "doables"--stepping stones to action. Only after the above measures have been taken should we move to this stage of designing action that can be accomplished. A common mistake is to start designing a solution way too soon. If we do, the conflict is simply repressed for a while and then rears its ugly head again. This very well may be what happened among Chloe's people in Corinth.

8. Make mutual-benefit agreements. While paying attention to each individual's needs we can now draw up a brief list of agreements from which all can feel they will benefit and which are best for the entire congregation.

This method of managing conflict will improve the habits that the congregation has drifted into in handling inevitable conflict. We may even discover members who are very skilled in conflict management upon whom we can call the next time we must deal with such situations. And there will be a next time!

Maintaining a congregation relatively free of conflict

There are ways that we can prevent much of the conflict that arises in congregations. Consider the following suggestions.

1. Keep a functioning Pastoral Relations committee meeting regularly and accessible to all congregational members.

2. When anticipating any major change, inform the congregation ahead of time what, why, and how you plan to do it.

3. See to it that all committee heads, hired personnel, volunteers, and clergy have well written and mutually agreed upon job descriptions.

4. Have all policies established ahead of the need for them. See that they are published and accessible to all.

5. Spread out responsibilities broadly among members.

6. Make sure that everyone not only knows the policies but also follows them.

7. Have easily available and frequent methods for everyone to provide feedback on the priorities and ministries of the congregation.

8. Have a workable system in place for disciplining a disruptive member.

We do not know the final outcome at the Corinthian congregation. It seems that when Chloe's people reported the conflicts there, it caused Paul great concern. He hoped that his letters to them and Timothy's visit (1 Cor 4:17) would produce the necessary changes in the church before he had to manage the conflict in person (4:21). It is clear from 2 Corinthians that that hope was not fulfilled: "For I fear that when I come, I may find you not as I wish, and that you may find me not as you wish; I fear that there may perhaps be quarreling, jealousy, anger, selfishness, slander, gossip, conceit, and disorder" (2 Cor 12:20).

Yes, Paul--and here in our congregations as well.

Additional reading

Cosgrove, Charles H., and Dennis D. Hat-field. Church Conflict: The Hidden Systems Behind the Fights. Nashville: Abingdon, 1994.

Curran Hoffman, Virginia. The Co-Dependent Church. New York: Crossroad, 1991.

Friedman, Edwin H. Generation to Generation: Family Process in Church and Synagogue. New York: Guilford, 1985.

Greenfield, Guy. The Wounded Minister: Healing from and Preventing Personal Attacks. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001.

Haverstadt, Hugh. Managing Church Conflicts. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991.

Johnson, David, and Jeff Van Vonderen. The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse. Minneapolis: Bethany, 1991.

Oats, Wayne. The Care of Troublesome People. Washington, D.C.: The Alban Institute, 1994.

Rediger, G. Lloyd. Clergy Killers: Guidance for Pastors and Congregations Under Attack. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997.

Wicks, Robert J. Christian Introspection: Self-Ministry through Self-Understanding. Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1983.

Jerry L. Schmalenberger

ELCA Global Mission Volunteer

Affiliate faculty, Lutheran Theological Seminary, Hong Kong

1. Gordon D. Fee, The New International Commentary on the New Testament. The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1987), 54.

2. Kenneth C. Haugk, Antagonists in the Church: How to Identify and Deal with Destructive Conflict (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1988), 25, 26.

3. Haugk, Antagonists, 27.

4. Haugk, Antagonists, 23.

5. Speed Leas, Moving Your Church through Conflict (Washington D.C.: The Alban Institute, 1985).

6. Haugk, Antagonists, 60-64.

7. Ron Susek, Firestorm: Preventing and Overcoming Church Conflicts (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999).

8. Susek, Firestorm, 88.

9. David W. Augsburger, Conflict Mediation across Cultures: Pathways and Patterns (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1992), 152.

10. Conflict Management in Congregations, ed. David B. Lott (Washington D.C.: The Alban Institute, 2001), 45-53.

11. Conflict Management in Congregations, 50.

12. Augsburger, Conflict Mediation, 236.

13. Augsburger, Conflict Mediation, 207.

14. Augsburger, Conflict Mediation, 95.

15. Dudley Weeks, The Eight Essential Steps to Conflict Resolution (New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putman, 1992), 70.