“And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.” – Ephesians 4:11-13 (NASB)
The company I work for has what they call a “one voice” policy. That is to say, if you are asked a question about the company by an outside entity other than customers, you are to refer them to the corporate public relations department. The purpose of the one voice policy is to protect the brand name of the company and to protect those that work there by providing a way of escape before being trapped into making a compromising statement about yourself, your co-workers, or the company as a whole.
During my Army career we had something similar. If the media was ever objective in its reporting, that time has long past. The media is a business, and they are not there to tell the facts. They are there to make sales. The more they can stir your emotions, the more they can get you to make “impulse buys” of their particular side to a story. So, while not as restrictive as the one voice policy described above, we underwent extensive training on how to interact with outside entities, particularly the media, along with which topics we could discuss and which topics we couldn’t. They were called talking points.
The idea of oneness, sameness, and unity abounds in Scripture. Our Lord and Savior prayed for it (John 17:23), the early church practiced it (Acts 2:46), and the epistles exhort it. Depending on how you read it, Ephesians 4 alone has up to 12 direct references to the idea of “one” or unity.
We all understand the idea behind unity and oneness in the body. As shepherds of the flock, we have to always be on guard for a lack of unity within the flock. Our minister, Dr. Matthew Morine, is fond of reminding us of the 1/3 rule. The 1/3 rule means no matter what you do 1/3 will like it, 1/3 will dislike it, and 1/3 could care less one way or the other. This becomes quite apparent when you try to implement a change that is scriptural but does not fit the traditional norm. Usually in such instances the 1/3 that dislikes it will become very vocal about their displeasure and find ways to try and bind tradition as scriptural fact, despite evidence and logical conclusions to the contrary.
Another action the 1/3 that dislikes a change will take is to attempt to triangulate the eldership. Instead of voicing their concerns to the eldership as a whole, they will find the elder they are most comfortable approaching, or the one they think will be most sympathetic to their opinions, or the one that is least equipped to deal with stress, tension, or conflict, and just “throw up” all their anxiety all over that one elder. Typically, the anxiety they espouse is filled with dire warnings of what will happen if a change is made and their predetermined resulting additional changes that will come if this newest change is implemented.
The purpose behind triangulating an elder is to make sure that elder is so overwhelmed that he forgets the 1/3 rule and assigns the unrest to the entire congregation instead of the vocal 1/3 it actually to whom it applies. Once this happens, the elder is convinced the best decision for the “whole” congregation is not to implement the change, even though in reality he has only heard from 1/3 of the members. This is an especially easy decision to make if the elder is already sympathetic to the opinions of the disliking 1/3. Then the elder uses his conclusion as the basis for arguing against the change when it is time for the eldership to make a final decision on the wisest course of action.
When the disliking 1/3 triangulates an elder they are demonstrating a disregard for Ephesians 4:1-3. To be fair, they are probably operating from pure motives. They are concerned for the congregation. They don’t want to see their leaders make unwise decisions. However, seldom do their concerns address what the Scriptures say as much as their concerns address their personal opinions and comfort levels. Moreover, seldom do their concerns address unity, other than to say they are not united enough to give the change an honest chance of working, nor are they united enough behind their leaders to trust their concerns will be considered but in the end the leaders will make decisions they feel will have the best interest of the entire congregation in mind, and not just any 1/3 of it.
If you don’t believe what I am saying, I challenge you to test it by making a change. For instance, try ending a long-running ministry or changing the long-running order of worship. It doesn’t matter that the ministry has run its course, doesn’t matter it is not bearing fruit, and doesn’t matter that not even 1/3 of the congregation is involved with it. Just try ending it and see if triangulation doesn’t start happening. It also doesn’t matter that it makes more sense to move the offering to particular time during the assembly. If it is different, if it is a change, you are going to hear about it. So, what do you do when (not if) this happens?
First, allow enough time before the change to inform the congregation about the change. Raise awareness about the proposed change and let them know the reasons behind the change. Second, create desire for the change. Not a desire based on preferences, but a desire based on the benefits, both to members as well as guests. It is hard to argue with a change that will lead to more evangelistic opportunities. Next you want to spend time raising their level of knowledge about the change. You want to spend time reassuring them the change does not violate Scripture. Then give the congregation the ability to implement the change by resourcing the change and involving influential members in the change. Finally, after some time, review the change and see if it is bearing fruit. If it isn’t, then admit as much. If it is bearing fruit then run with it and just tweak the change as you go. In other words, lead through the change. This all sounds great, and I have seen it work. However, what do you do if you mess this process up?
First, remember if you are in an eldership you do not have your own voice. When I joined the Army I voluntarily relinquished certain rights, one of them being the right to free speech. The same could be said of the eldership. When you agreed to serve as one of the shepherds of a congregation, you voluntarily relinquished the right to express your own personal opinion about matters. Be aware that if you say something, you are perceived as speaking for the eldership. Also be aware that if you express your personal opinion to any of the 1/3 that you are creating potential for disunity in the eldership if you haven’t discussed the concerns and agreed upon what the eldership will decide and what the eldership will say about the matter. By all means express your personal opinions with your fellow elders and allow them to express theirs. However, you must present a unified message and decision to the congregation or you will end up increasing disunity in the congregation. Also, before you say anything to your fellow elders, consider if you are expressing your opinion or the opinion of any one of the 1/3s. Additionally, if you allow yourself to be influenced by any of the 1/3 because of how vocal they are, and if you say something supporting their opinions to them without discussing it with your fellow elders, you have overstepped your bounds as a shepherd and made a de facto decision for the eldership without discussing it with them first.
I pray your congregation is united. I pray your eldership is united. I pray you don’t fall into the trap of triangulation as you shepherd your congregations to glorify God by creating contagious faith that fulfills the Great Commission.
May your blessings exceed mine today and every day.
-DEM