Every time we say, “I believe in the Holy Spirit,” we mean that we believe there is a living God able and willing to enter human personality and change it.
J.B. Phillips
The intertestamental book Bel and the Dragon describes a confrontation between Daniel and a great living dragon the Babylonians revered. When Daniel was pressured to bow before the monster, he said to the king, “If you will give me permission, I will slay the dragon without sword or club.” The king agreed.
As verse 27 relates, “Then Daniel took pitch, fat, and hair, and boiled them together and made cakes, which he fed to the dragon. The dragon ate them, and burst open.”
That’s one kind of effective confrontation. Unfortunately, it’s an approach that probably should not be used with dragons in the church. Unlike Daniel or Saint George, the goal of a pastor is not to slay but to tame the beast, to prevent further destruction on either side.
Such work is rarely easy, never fun, but it is possible. Before looking at the important elements of effective confrontation, we must clarify what dragon taming is not.
It is not suppressing differences of opinion. These are inevitable and even desirable — one person’s insights balance another’s quirks. The church is stronger when its unity comes out of diversity, when the body of Christ is more than birds of a feather flocking together. Unless the differing opinions are outright heresy or vitriol, they need not be feared.
Controlled friction produces energy, and energy is essential for creativity and effectiveness in church life. Different ideas should be allowed to coexist, and God allowed to take the lead, thereby raising one opinion to prominence.
A person is not a dragon because of different ideas but destructive actions.
Neither is confrontation the silencing of all complainers. Chronic complainers need to be deflected, not destroyed. Most gripers are low-octane hostiles who merely like to share their misery. Generally they’re not destructive unless they’re given the spotlight or made into martyrs. While their complaints aren’t pleasant to hear, remember that complainers are rarely leaders themselves; their gripes are usually a symptom of their sense of powerlessness.
How do you handle complainers? Not by arguing — they’re rarely willing to be convinced — but by letting them know there are other ways of looking at the situation. “You think Fred’s solo was rotten? That’s interesting. I enjoy that kind of medley now and then.”
On the other hand, taming dragons is not giving in, becoming a doormat, appeasing them so they won’t spew their wrath throughout the church. Simply because leaders are servants doesn’t mean they must passively accept injustice or ignore threats to the body. Just a few sentences after writing those lofty verses on imitating Christ’s humility and servanthood in Philippians 2, Paul warns, “Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh” (3:2). Hardly kind words, but the words of a servant dedicated to protecting his Father’s house.
What then is dragon taming? What is the point of any confrontation? Not stifling people’s ideas but protecting the church from those acting in destructive ways. In that effort, the right attitude, atmosphere, and approach are essential.
The Attitude in Confronting
Often the greatest damage is not done by the dragons themselves but by the overreactions they provoke in others. When attacked by dragons, our normal response is to become upset or defensive, and when we feel threatened, we usually wind up dousing the fire with gasoline.
In most disputes neither side is entirely innocent. And even if our cause is completely right, we lose if we respond wrongly. The situation only gets worse.
The confrontation of dragons has to be carried out in love — smart love. “Always view the other person as a child of God like yourself,” said one Arizona pastor. That is, of course, easier said than done.
The trick is to accept the dragon as a person of worth while not approving of his or her controlling tactics. It means trying to maintain an open relationship and keeping it current. Knowing what’s going on in the lives of difficult members often proves helpful in their taming. Smart love also means trying to see the church and its perceived problems from their viewpoint.
One pastor resisted his impulse to ignore a young man who openly criticized him for moving too slowly to establish a small-group ministry. Instead, he spent time with the young man and discovered his doctors had recently found malignant cells in his blood. Suddenly he understood the young man’s impatience and desire for community.
Pastors have discovered several helpful keys in establishing the right kind of attitude for dragon confrontation.
First, as early in the conflict as possible, someone must verbalize what Norm Shawchuck, in How to Manage Conflict in the Church, has called the three P’s of conflict management:
Permission: Everyone involved must be told that disagreements are OK. No one should feel guilty about offering a dissenting view.
Potency: Each person must be allowed to state his or her position with strength and clarity. There’s nothing unhealthy about airing feelings as long as we respect one another.
Protection: No one will be intentionally hurt, nor will anyone be allowed to inflict needless hurt.
Unless these ground rules are openly stated, conflicts will often be prolonged as people avoid the real issues until they feel secure enough to speak up without risking irreparable damage to the church or themselves.
Second, if possible, reframe the dragons. The natural response when under attack is to put up defenses, if not visibly, at least emotionally. We’re hurt, and like any injury, our hurt makes us more sensitive to the slightest pressure. Things that before wouldn’t have bothered us now make us recoil.
Reframing how we see the dragons can help keep us from overreacting.
One Sunday when Howard Warren stepped into the pulpit, his glance fell upon the Millers in the fifth row, Mike on one end, Erika on the other, and four kids in between. Suddenly Howard found his mouth dry, he couldn’t seem to breathe, and he couldn’t remember what he’d intended to say.
The Millers were irregular attenders, but they had started a Bible study in their home and were teaching some things in direct conflict with the church’s statement of faith. Howard had had some bad experiences with outside groups preying on church people in the past, and he feared the Millers would make their way through the congregation spreading unrest if not outright heresy.
Something had to be done. He didn’t know what he was going to say, but he had made an appointment to visit the Miller home Tuesday evening. He wasn’t looking forward to the encounter.
He managed to get through his sermon, but his delivery was rough, disjointed. He doubted if many people sensed his discomfort, but he knew he wasn’t getting through.
Afterward Jeff Duncan, the youth pastor, came into the office and asked, “Was something bothering you today?”
“I was hoping it didn’t show,” Howard said. He told Jeff about his dread of confronting the Millers. “I looked at them in the pew, and all I saw was two lions on either side of the path. I felt like they were going to devour me, and if not me, then everything else in the church.”
“Don’t look at them as lions,” Jeff said. “Look at them as wounded sheep.”
The simple difference worked. In a moment, Howard’s fear was gone. “I’ve never taken them out of that frame,” he says now, three years later. “Jeff’s observation was true, not that the Millers’ lives were in disarray, but they had come through some difficult times and needed to be encouraged. I assumed they were wounded sheep, I loved them, and when we talked about the Bible study, they happily agreed not to teach those doctrines.”
The Millers have joined the church, and Howard Warren enjoys a growing relationship with them.
Reframing doesn’t change the dragons, but it can change the way we treat them. And sometimes that’s enough.
Third, pray not only about, but for the dragons. It’s easier to publicize foibles and faults than to pray for them. But when you genuinely pray for the person hurting you, a whole new dimension enters.
Samuel offers a marvelous model. He had been the Godappointed judge and unquestioned leader of Israel, but when he was old, the people turned against him, demanding a king instead. Samuel tried to dissuade them. But when they insisted, he didn’t resign or shake his fist or whine over his blemished career.
Instead he said, “For the sake of his great name, the Lord will not reject his people, because the Lord was pleased to make you his own. As for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the Lord by failing to pray for you. And I will teach you the way that is good and right” (1 Sam. 12:22-23).
Even after his defeat in the “business meeting,” Samuel recognized that God’s people deserve prayer simply because they are God’s. How difficult it must have been to continue to pray and teach. But if he could do it for a nationful of obstinate dragons, might it be possible on behalf of a churchful?
Finally, be gentle but firm. If you’re a church leader, the authority is on your side and people expect you to take the initiative.
This is particularly necessary with people who want to be the convicting voice of the Holy Spirit for other people’s lives. One pastor was taken aside by a young man and told, “You’re working in the wrong area. Your spiritual gift is evangelism, not church planting or nurture. You should be on the road as an evangelist.”
After two or three of these jabs, the pastor was torn. Was he right? Am I really doing what God wants me to do? Because the young man was a sincere and committed worker, the pastor’s emotional upheaval was even greater. After two months of self-doubt, the pastor finally said, “I’ve listened to your advice, and I appreciate your input, but I cannot accept it. It has caused confusion in my life that didn’t exist before you spoke, and I don’t think God wants us to continue in confusion. If God wanted me to change ministries, he’d probably tell me, wouldn’t you think? Especially after you sensitized me to the issue.”
The young man accepted the pastor’s judgment. He apologized for being so forward and putting the pastor through two months of turmoil. This rather harmless dragon was tamed largely because of the respectful but firm way he was approached by the pastor.
A tougher situation is when certain church members are devoted to a national religious figure who has different views from the pastor. They want the church’s teaching, vocabulary, and style to parallel that of the prominent personality. How can a pastor who speaks to hundreds dare disagree with someone who speaks to hundreds of thousands?
What is the best way to respond? “Attacking the views of the personality does not work,” says a Nebraska pastor. “The moment you do that, you become the bad guy. You don’t have the credibility to attack a ‘hero of the faith.’ Besides, I appreciate 95 percent of what the celebrity says; it’s just the 5 percent and the way people want to apply it in our church that becomes divisive.”
Again, a gentle but firm attitude is the best response. The direction and style of ministry are the responsibility of the pastor and board. In this situation, the battle to be fought is not over the particulars but over the authority and decision-making process in the church.
“The only thing that’s worked for us is pointing out that as pastor, I, along with our board, have been given the responsibility for this congregation,” says the Nebraska pastor. “When we hear them out but gently explain that we have to make hard decisions about what our church can do in our situation, they accept that more readily.”
The spirit needed for confronting dragons is not one of fear and withdrawal nor of arrogant power. It is gentleness and firmness — an attitude of smart love.
The Atmosphere for Confronting
The climate of any encounter with dragons can be an important factor in improving or damaging the relationship. A setting where no one is likely to lose face — a private, unhurried conversation — is most effective in restoring relationships. Two important aspects of creating the right atmosphere are timing and location.
The timing must be planned with an eye on the emotional barometer. Confrontations are usually precipitated by a particular experience that cannot be ignored, something that makes us say, “Now he’s gone too far.”
If we respond too quickly, while the emotional barometer still reads too high, both we and the dragon risk not being able to see all sides of the issue. The prophet Nathan waited a year after David’s sin with Bathsheba before confronting the king. While it probably wasn’t a case of Nathan needing to calm down, perhaps it took that long for David to be open to receive Nathan’s accusation.
On the other hand, if we wait too long, the unresolved situation can raise the frustration level until we lose emotional control, as Charles Westerman did in chapter 4.
“Before I confront anyone, I call a fellow pastor and talk through the situation,” says an experienced minister. “That calms me down, helps me clarify the approach to take, and helps me get my motives straightened out.”
The location of a meeting can also help or hinder the cause.
Holding a meeting in the pastor’s office gives a definite advantage if we want to exert our authority, negotiate from strength, or exercise discipline. It is our turf — our desk, our chair, our pictures, our calendar. We can control the seating, and unless there’s a separate seating area, we’ll probably be in the ultimate power position — behind a desk. Most people who enter will feel they have entered our realm and grant us the right to set the agenda and take the initiative.
It’s a good situation for a showdown but probably not the place to build or restore a relationship. It makes many people feel defensive, insecure, unable to open up fully. A Lutheran pastor admitted the breakdown in a relationship with one man in the congregation was partially caused by an office conversation. The man had been overstating his position in church business meetings, and the pastor thought a gentle word about diplomacy would help. But the man misinterpreted the gesture and told his friends the pastor had “tried to silence me.”
“I found out later this man had often been called in and reprimanded by his boss at work,” says the pastor. “That’s how he interpreted my action. Another setting would have helped.”
A second option is neutral turf — a restaurant, for instance. While not offering the home field advantage, it proves a better setting for building relationships or negotiating as equals. “I use several coffee shops that have a back table or quiet room where we can have a private conversation,” says a Covenant Church pastor. “I always tell them I’m picking up the tab, and we make small talk until we place our orders. Then I bring up the issue we need to discuss. The neutral turf has almost always proven beneficial in working through differences.”
A third option is meeting on the other person’s home turf. Some pastors report this works best for first getting acquainted with newcomers or, with dragons, when coming to them on their terms. This can be effective when we sense something is wrong and want to take the first step toward reconciliation, or when we need to apologize. In their own house or apartment, people are more likely to feel free to talk, to air their strong emotions. They feel more in control.
Many meetings, of course, are also held at the church — in conference rooms around a table or in the sanctuary pews. These are usually attended by more than two or three people. Each location establishes its own atmosphere.
One principle, however, does seem to hold true whatever the room arrangement: If you anticipate problems from someone at the meeting, sit right next to him or her, rather than across. It is very difficult to argue with someone when you’re not in the traditional positions of confrontation. Breaking down the physical distance seems to chip away at the emotional distance.
If you want a direct confrontation, however, sitting directly across from the person is the most effective arrangement.
These are all generalizations, of course, but when dealing with dragons, the nonverbal communication is important.
The Approach to Confronting
The procedure offered by Jesus in Matthew 18 for dealing with “your brother (who) sins against you” — talking privately, meeting with witnesses, and finally telling it to the church — is also a good order to follow with dragons. But between the private conversation and church action, there are several other intermediate steps that can be taken.
Private conversation. Initially, this is not a confrontation but an attempt to understand the other person and see him as Christ does. The goal is to emphasize the many ways you are alike, to see some glory in one another’s life. More people are changed by attention and understanding than correction and coercion.
The book The One-Minute Manager makes the point well: If you’re going to correct someone effectively, every criticism has to be accompanied by a compliment — in the same context and with virtually the same breath. People are more willing to change when they know they’re appreciated, understood, and valued.
Then represent your view clearly and concisely. Try to remember your larger mission — to build the whole church body, including this person — and explain the spiritual issues involved.
If the areas of disagreement are significant, a willingness to bend is the next step. Some members of a Southern Baptist church in Louisiana were angry with the pastor because the church didn’t have a Women’s Missionary Union. His past experiences with them had been negative, and he didn’t want to drain the energy from the outreach to the unchurched he was emphasizing. When he met with the malcontents, he went willing to bend, willing to adjust to any needs he hadn’t seen before. He asked why they felt a WMU was important. “We need Bible study and fellowship for women” was the reply.
“Fine,” he said. “Why don’t we start a morning Bible study for women, with baby sitting provided by the church? It will give women a chance to invite their neighbors to take a break from the kids. It will offer fellowship, Bible study, and evangelism opportunities.”
Everyone was happy with the solution.
The most common mistake in dealing with dragons is approaching them judgmentally, assuming theirs is a sin problem. “I used to say, ‘If you don’t quit what you’re doing, we’re going to have to take action against you,'” says an Oregon pastor. “But our first approach should be one of compassion, because nine out of ten sinners in the church are hurting more than we imagine. Now I’ll put my arm around a man and say in private, ‘Jim, I’ve heard some things, like …. Is there any truth to this?’ Often he’ll break down and acknowledge it. But my key question is ‘How can I help you?’ It usually takes them by surprise.”
If understanding, willingness to bend, and compassion don’t work, try at least to agree on how you’ll disagree.
One outspoken matron, a charter member of an independent congregation in Wisconsin, habitually and openly criticized the pastor’s sermons, board decisions, and anything else she didn’t care for. She was an accomplished parliamentarian and often used the church constitution to frustrate the desires of the majority.
One day the pastor told her, “Marion, let’s agree on one point anyway: When you have a complaint, come to me first. Do not talk to anyone else. Maybe we’ll be able to solve the problem without getting the whole church upset.” She made the promise.
But within a month, as the pastor suspected she would, she was carping after church about the way the new lines were painted on the parking lot. The pastor invited her into the office. “We’ve had disagreements in the past, Marion. But one thing I’ve never accused you of is lying.”
“What do you mean?” she asked.
“You promised me you’d see me first with your complaints, and yet you were telling Mildred Hansen your objections to the work in the parking lot.”
Marion, an honest person, admitted she broke her promise. Being caught in the act surprised her. She stopped complaining, and within months she was one of the pastor’s strongest backers, occasionally to his embarrassment when she continued to use technical parliamentary procedure for his benefit.
Witnesses. Sometimes private conversations, even with all the peacemaking techniques we can muster, are not enough. At that point, witnesses are necessary. Especially if the conflict involves us personally, other people can be used to resolve the problem. Those in the church who are respected by the dissidents and yet willing to defend another position can be effective in confrontations with rampaging dragons.
Pastor Roger Smalley had a policy that he would not perform the wedding ceremony of a Christian marrying a non-Christian. When Roger explained the policy to Ed Hogan’s daughter, who wanted to marry a man who had not accepted Christ, Ed was irate. In the adult Sunday school class, he stood up and asked how the pastor could get away with not doing his job and refusing to perform a wedding for a member of the church.
Roger, who wasn’t in the class at the time, felt that since he was the object of Ed’s wrath, perhaps the Anders, long-time members of the church and friends of the Hogans, could be more effective peacemakers. Roger explained the reasons behind his policy to the Anders and asked them to visit Ed.
They did, explaining the biblical instructions against being “unequally yoked” and pointing out that the pastor had counseled many people coming from this kind of spiritual mismatch whose marriages later fell apart. They said the pastor was convinced it was a mistake even from a practical point of view. The Anders succeeded in getting Ed to concede the pastor did have a point. In time, Ed and the pastor were able to repair their relationship.
At the point private conversations do not resolve the situation and witnesses become involved, two other cautions should probably be taken: begin taking notes and inform the board.
Note taking is a defensive move. Often dragons are in the business of collecting injustices real and perceived. They may charge us with breaking promises, or perhaps they’ll later misrepresent conversations.
After the relationship has broken down, pastors should have a witness present in any subsequent extended conversation. But in addition, it is wise to keep a written record of the content of the conversation and any conclusions reached. The lightest ink is better than the longest memory. Not only does it help both sides keep the facts straight, but it also saves lost sleep trying to recall the order of events if things heat up later on.
As soon as a dispute doesn’t respond to personal persuasion, and definitely if any specific action is going to be attempted, it’s time to inform the board. Without the support of the board, firm action is impotent if not impossible.
In one Texas church, an elder was very nonchalant about his duties. He stopped attending worship services, and even his attendance at board meetings was sporadic. The rest of the board recognized the problem, but no one was willing to risk losing the man’s friendship by confronting him.
The pastor saw no choice but to take action himself. He visited the man and suggested he needed to become more active or else resign his board position, or take another position in the church that didn’t require so much time. The encounter seemed to go smoothly, with the elder agreeing to “think it over.”
The following day, however, the pastor got several phone calls from church members wanting to know “why you asked Brother Rod to leave the church.” The elder and his family left the church “because of the preacher.” The next month was spent trying to correct the false rumors.
“My mistake was acting alone,” says the pastor. “The situation could have been avoided if I’d insisted that at least one other elder accompany me. If no one was willing, I should have waited until someone was. The leadership as a whole must be willing to administer discipline for it to be effective.”
Tell it to the church. What do you tell? You do not treat the situation as a trial, with the congregation as jury. “Our elders made a mistake by, in essence, trying a woman before the congregation,” says one Church of Christ minister. “They told specific times, dates, places—and seemed to be building a case, trying to convince the congregation this woman needed discipline. That’s the wrong spirit.”
What should they have done?
“Explain simply that reconciliation and restoration were needed, and efforts up to this point had not been successful.”
Telling the church is not punishment; it is enlisting the help of the whole body in reconciliation. According to the Church of Christ minister, “The spirit needs to be, ‘We have dealt personally with this matter and have failed to reconcile. We have gone with two or three others, and that has failed. Now we’re taking the next step and asking you, the congregation, to work with us toward restoration. Perhaps you can succeed where we have failed.'”
Treat him as you would a pagan or tax collector. If the entire church cannot bring reconciliation, the final step, according to Matthew 18, is recognizing that the person is no longer part of the body. Almost always, this is merely an acknowledgement of what has, in fact, already taken place.
“In sixteen years of practicing church discipline,” says one West Coast pastor, “we have never reached this step without the person leaving the church on his own, but we still recognize publicly what has happened—that this person is no longer part of us. Not to do so would be tacit acceptance of that person’s behavior, and that’s hypocrisy—teaching one thing, accepting another.”
Treating a person as a publican or pagan, however, is not shaming or despising him. Jesus was known for loving publicans and sinners. But neither did he pretend they were soul mates. This is the delicate balance the church must walk with unrepentant dragons—to love them as outsiders to be won over.
In dealing with dragons, public action is a last recourse, obviously. “Never get in a spittin’ match with a skunk,” says the folk wisdom. “Even if you win, you come out smelling bad.” Dragon/pastor conflicts can normally be settled behind the scenes. Even most dragon/church conflicts can be settled without a public show of force.
The only times public action is ever appropriate is for continuing, confirmed, and unconfessed sin. And never unless the leadership of the church supports the move. Bringing things into the open too quickly is more dangerous than waiting too long.
Rather than forcing the issue publicly, often more is gained by learning to minister in an unresolved situation.
Copyright © 1985 by Christianity Today
