Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. (Ephesians 4:25)
The communication between YAF members should be just like the recent YAF camp. No masks, no hypocrisy, no reservations, even when dealing with conflict. However, our work culture does not always encourage that.
Corporate Culture does not encourage honest communication
In our respective workplace, those at a management level have a way of maintaining Public Relations or Professionalism. Some do not believe that there is an absolute moral standard. At times, they over trust their personal judgment. Some managers do not allow their employees to bring in moral standards of what should or should not be said and done. They evade every problem concerning people.
Because of such corporate cultures, Christians are used to evading human issues. Those whom are deeply immersed in a culture of maintaining public relations would avoid confrontations and not solve any personal issues.
“Really? Don't think it happened before!”
“ We are professionals and our responsibility is to do our job. We do not discuss right or wrong.”
However this attitude of avoidance contradicts the teachings in Ephesians 4:25. In some matters, avoiding the matter may make matters worse.
People say: To each his own (人说：公说公有理，婆说婆有理)
The Asian culture is deeply influenced by Confucianism. In the minds of corporate managers, they tend to handle corporate conflicts by using “公说公有理，婆说婆有理” (to each his own), a Confucianist way of thinking.
It describes a situation when the father-in-law quarrels with the mother-in-law, both will insist they are right. It is a belittling remark to describe people who think they are right.
Just take a look at this advice from a manager in dealing with conflict:
“We do not need to think over the details of human problems or the truth. To each his own. As managers, we just point out whatever we think could be wrong, and tell your staff 'That's the end! Get back to work. Separate work and personal affairs. We have to produce results. Let's be professional.' ”
Here is a story of Calvin who suffered under this manager.
Calvin is a Christian who worked in an events company in charge of clothing equipment. His fellow storeman Ryan was in-charge of food and beverages for guests at an event. In his sheer laziness, Ryan failed to prepare the food and beverages on time. When the manager came down on the store men, Ryan pushed all the blame to Calvin. Calvin defended himself but the officer was detestful of the personal squabbles between Ryan and Calvin. The manager believed in “公说公有理，婆说婆有理” (To each his own).
So the manager decided to side with Ryan based on his instinct. Calvin had to call his immediate superior to intervene and proved with official documents that it was Ryan who was formally responsible.
No wonder when some of us absorb work culture into the church culture, we decide what is right for church based on what we feel. We decide we never ever have to follow the precedent of Deuteronomy 13:12-14 and investigate hear-says and opinions thoroughly. We became clones of the unreasonable manager.
I took a step back and reflected on the different actions of Calvin’s manager and his immediate superior. Calvin’s manager is a not a Christian, so he does not see the need to adhere to Deuteronomy 13:12-14. But all of us in Young Adults Fellowship are Christians. We have no reason to ignore Deuteronomy 13:12-14.
Calvin’s immediate superior is a reflection of the Christian response to disputes and conflicts. He heard both sides of the story before taking relevant actions for a peaceful conclusion. That is the Christian way. We do not assume the moral judge and demand peace on our own perception immediately without investigation. We do not skip the process of investigation. We do not act on complaints and one-sided arguments.
God’s guidelines for Christian living are nowhere near “公说公有理，婆说婆有理” and methods for managing conflict
It is true that we are bound by work hierarchy. We cannot always speak up against management level above us who have done wrong. However, does the church hierarchy system dictate that church leaders are always right? The truth is, no one in church is beyond reproach, not even church leaders, as shown in 3 John 1:9-10. The church does not exist to embrace 公说公有理，婆说婆有理. Instead, we live to embrace God’s truth; truly godly leaders would delight in the church members to “walk in truth” (3 John 1:4).
Because we have God’s truth, we are never called to believe everyone has their own points of view and that they can override God’s will and find their own truth to Christian living. Neither do we walk in management theories or PR relations, that are more concerned with events or results than people. When Jesus gave the Great Commission, he did not say “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, all the management and PR methods and stop being honest to each other”. The only real Great Commission is in Matthew 28:19-20, and it is about teaching Christians God’s ways, and that includes the Ephesians 4:25 message of honest communication, not management and PR methods, or any of the ways of the world!
If we bring in management theories and PR methods to replace God’s principles, fellowship will just be about getting the events right, ensuring chairs are ready for programmes, ensuring meeting agendas are met, while ignoring honest communication mentioned in Eph 4:25. A person lacking in God’s truths but seeped in management theories and PR methods may only seek a forced front of hospitality. I have encountered that a couple of times in my journalistic exploits. Any working professional can put up with colleagues he hates and pretends to be nice – while hiding bitterness in their hearts. True love for Christians goes far beyond that version of hospitality which is not truthful.
Our love for one another is greater than mere hospitality that avoids honest communication. God wants our love for brothers and sisters to be “with a pure heart” (1 Peter 1:22). God wants us to speak “the truth in love” so we can grow in Christ (Ephesians 4:15). A person used to PR relations may not be ready to speak the truth in love, to ensure he don't offend anyone. As Christians, we cannot separate love and truth, even if it may offend.
There are times we have to remind each other to steer towards the right path, even if we may offend, because we love each other. Love from the heart does not include dishonesty, pretention, PR methods, or making judgments without proper investigation. Christians live a different life to Calvin’s manager because we know Eph 4:25 and are called to honesty. Even if saying the right things may cause discomfort, like iron sharpening iron, we know it is to make us better Christians (Prov 27:17).
If we trust the mantra of “公说公有理，婆说婆有理” completely, the church can be in trouble. If a man walks into church, leads a sinful life and leads half a church to sin, does that mean the deacons and elders cannot reproach the false teacher and insist they are right? If the supporters of the sinful man can claim 公说公有理，婆说婆有理, they can force the church to condemn the deacons and elders for rebuking the false teacher. That church would be in serious trouble.
This problem of “公说公有理，婆说婆有理” happened in Calvin’s church in a different form as well. His church took “公说公有理，婆说婆有理” to a different level. Some leaders believe since Calvin and a sister-in-Christ, Vanessa, had some previous conflict, they should avoid each other totally.
Avoiding at all costs is the antithesis of honest communication (Eph 4:25)
Calvin and Vanessa had romantic feelings for each other but they drifted apart due to lifestyle differences. Calvin grew up with a love for drawing and painting, household chores, enjoying the beauty of flora and fauna. Vanessa’s family members were all athletes and trophies adore their living room. She was a task-oriented woman, who enjoys the thrill of mountain climbing and scuba diving, the adrenaline of completing a marathon rather than listening to Calvin’s melancholy. Their differences caused a rift and their church fellowship was divided over them.
Yet Calvin hoped he would somehow still be friends with Vanessa, and communicate like brothers and sisters-in-Christ. But an invisible barrier caused awkward communication between him and Vanessa.
One fine day, Calvin was reminded of Vanessa on a trip with friends. He sent a SMS to Vanessa, “Hey, Vanessa, I haven’t heard from you for a long time. I’m having a good time shopping for running shoes. I’ll run with my mates at the nature reserve. I hope you will find time in your busyness to continue your healthy lifestyle.”
Calvin was not asking Vanessa to join him for a run. He only hoped that after the long quiet time, she would reciprocate his goodwill and at least be friends.
Vanessa may have a business-like streak in her bank job, making sound decisions at the flick of a coin. But she also had an emotional core that overrides her rational mind. She saw Calvin message and thought it meant “Come join me for a run”. She replied, “Sorry, I’m not free to join you. Enjoy yourself.”
Calvin was fine with that. He knows he cannot force friendship when there are misunderstandings. But what happened the next day was hard to swallow for any Christian. It was unloving.
PR management is not the honest communication stated in Ephesians 4:25
Philip was sensitive to her cousin, Vanessa’s discomfort “about Calvin's run” and acted on his own account without checking the SMS. Like the manager in Calvin’s company, Philip had no idea of the whole truth and in his moment of misjudgment, he tried to resolve the conflict without the truth. He approached Calvin with a barbed statement typical of the self-righteous boss, “So you have been running. I think you better avoid going to that nature reserve again.”
Calvin was taken aback and asked sternly, “Why?” There was no answer from Philip so he walked off. That was a typical management style answer from people in management in our secular world. They may not want to waste time hearing stories or knowing who is right, who is wrong. They do not care if they have judged people with limited information or prejudice, just like Calvin’s manager. They just believe in getting the job done.
But we are a church, not a corporate. Judging your brother based on limited information is sinful. We may have Calvins in our midst. People judge them and try to put restrictions on where they can jog, while they ask questions about these unwarranted judgements. If any of us hear efforts to clear misunderstandings, we have to respond, because Ephesians 4:25 says so about honest communication.
When we choose the PR management style response of Philip, it merely breeds resentment and mistrust. There was no doubt in Calvin’s mind he would continue running in that nature reserve with his friends whenever he needed some natural air. But he also knows fellowship-ping with Philip and his like-minded friends is stifling. Doubt fills the air between them.
Weeks past. Calvin remembered Colossians 3:13 that read:
Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any; even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.
One Sunday afternoon, he walked to Philip and asked, “Hey, are any of you guys going for lunch later?”
For reasons unknown to Calvin, Philip said with much hesitation, “Well, I… I don’t think so. I am busy. Rushing off soon myself, I guess. I’m busy today.” He proceeded to ignore Calvin.
Calvin decided he should attend an exhibition instead. It’s not the first time someone in church had rejected him because of Vanessa, anyway. As he walked to the bus stop, he glanced back. Then he saw it. Vanessa, Philip and others got into a car and drove off, followed closely by another car full of people.
“This is not the first time some of them have deliberately separated us,” Calvin muttered under his breath, “When can our fellowship be united in honest fellowship without pretention again? How can I trust and have confidence in everyone?”
Someone was heard whispering in the corner, “Philip said Calvin is a nuisance and should stop contacting Vanessa altogether. Yet I remember Tom telling me Calvin has no intentions of pursuing anything special with Vanessa already and they should reconcile.“公说公有理，婆说婆有理” I have no idea who’s right, who’s wrong. I don’t care. I think we should just continue to separate them. We must preserve our church unity”
Yet another haste corporate-styled decision just for a quick fix. However, that is also not true unity. A united church is different from a refrigerator, or an events company.
The church is not a refrigerator or an events company
The church is not a refrigerator where we divide food. We leave our ice-cream in the freezing units like how Calvin was left out for meals whenever Vanessa was around.
We keep our fruits in the refrigerator where others are free to fellowship and mingle with the vegetables, while Calvin was left out in the cold of the freezer, pun intended. It’s weird how leaders say we are united yet we form exclusive groups for unity and less conflict. For the sake of this article’s discussion, I shall call such a scenario an “exclusive group”.
Neither is the church an events company where it does not matter if anyone is at conflict or suffering as long as the events run well.
I have once asked a church leader many years ago about reconciliation. Asked to take a stand, he shrugged his shoulders and said nonchalantly in typical PR management, “If anyone has a problem with another, I’ll just make sure they don’t communicate with each other. As long as we are serving and united in my fellowship aims and visions, things are fine. Don’t ask people who had previous conflicts out for dinner together after church so we have less of a problem at hand.”
That is how management in corporates tries to unite people. However, that is not unity in Christ. We have to understand that differences between the church and the corporate calls for a different approach to unity.
That is how management in corporates tries to unite people. However, that is not unity in Christ. We have to understand that differences between the church and the corporate calls for a different approach to unity.
Differences between the Church and the Corporate
The example of Calvin and Vanessa is just one of the conflicts we have seen in church. Conflicts are sometimes inevitable. Yet for all the various kinds of conflict we may see in church, we have to focus on God’s way of unity, and not depend wholeheartedly on worldly management methods, Public Relations, or teachings of Confucianism.
Confucianism has its value in society but not the church. But Christians have to understand the philosophy may work for corporates, but not the church. In a corporate, the management may not want to handle moral disputes between staff to ensure uninterrupted workflow and concrete results. Workers who do not agree with the companies’ values are encouraged to leave, transfer out or quit to seek more suitable careers. And peace might ensue. I have once heard a government official say this to his staff, “We are on a train. If you don’t like it here, you may alight.”
The church is different from the official’s corporate ideas. We can’t push people out of trains just because we have different ideas. The church is different from a corporate in its leadership. Corporate have human leaders, churches have our God as our Lord. Church leaders have been warned for creating divisions (1 Corinthians 1:10-13). We can’t be ostracizing people, encouraging each other to leave, transfer to another department or quit to another church. That is unloving behavior. By deliberately excluding members, that is an act that quietly pushes people to the freezer unit or out of the church.
Unlike a corporate that does not have an absolute moral standard, Christians do have absolute moral standards in the Bible. Corporates are filled with people from various backgrounds with different ideas of morality, so it’s virtually impossible for a standard moral ground for employees. There is no way any secular leader can implement a common moral standard. For that reason,“公说公有理，婆说婆有理” is acceptable and secular leaders would rather have their organisations united in professionalism and other corporate values. But churches have God who gave the church the Bible and its moral standards. We are a Body that pledge its allegiance to Christ, and not the corporate values.
The Bible does not define a church body’s communication or unity by corporate values, “公说公有理，婆说婆有理” or Confucianism. We can glean from the Bible the essence of true unity.
True unity is not found in avoidance, but in God’s will
For a church to be pleasing to God, bringing in the secular management and PR methods will lead the church nowhere. All the wisdom of corporate gurus, world management methods, Public Relations or Confucianism pale in comparison to God’s wisdom for the church (1 Cor 1:20-21). God knows what He wants for His church, and we are to carry them out. Our unity is in Christ and Christ alone, not in any other value or human aim.
Hence, there is no other route to unity except unity in God’s ways and command. True unity is also for all believers to be united together as one, not in divisions (John 17:21; 1 Corinthians 1:10). Romans 12:5 tells us: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one member one of another.
It is perfectly all right to have small gatherings after church. But there is no such thing as “exclusive groups” formed to “create unity” with the hope that one or two person would be absent. It is ridiculous to have leaders who lie to members to outcast them for unity in the exclusive group. That is schism, and divisions that ostracizes people (1 Cor 12:25-26). God has never allowed us to part with a body part (1 Cor 12:12-14).
Our spirit of unity is not adopting an ‘avoid at all costs” to avoid conflict; that is unloving to Calvin. Our unity, not avoidance, should glorify God (Romans 15:5-6).
Unity is also about growth. We are to do our best in the bond of peace (Ephesians 4:3); this peace is about living with each other in love, not ostracizing or avoiding each other (Ephesians 4:2). We are to be mature (Ephesians 4:13), but this maturity is not in the worldly sense. The world may preach that it is wise for people in previous conflict should avoid each other and, to quote “公说公有理，婆说婆有理”, that all approaches are correct, even at the expense of ostracizing people.
Yet, the Bible is clear that we ought not to ostracize or avoid each other. We are warned not to bring in the world’s methods to the church carelessly, and be “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (Ephesians 4:14). God’s ways are for us to follow, not for us to reject in favour of what’s popular or common in our worlds.
The unity mentioned in Ephesians 4:13 is in knowing nature of Christ and maturity by Christ’s standards; taking sides, ostracizing, and making them avoid each other without reconciliation is far from the will of Christ. In Ephesians 4:25 at the beginning of this sharing – Christians in unity has to reject dishonest dealings. It has to involve honest communication in the church. These are part of God’s will for Christian to follow. In Romans 12:5, we learn that every member is part of the Body of Christ, so we do not purposely separate people or form outcasts.
Therefore, it is plain clear that God’s will for unity in the church is nowhere near whatever we have learnt in our corporate world or other traditions. So we can be well-versed in the world’s methods of handling conflict, but God won’t see us as mature in that way.
All forms of unity outside God’s will are not considered true unity. Even if the whole fellowship decides on a different model of unity, it still does not sway God’s will for our unity. We must note that the secular methods of managing conflicts and unity may bring about undesirable outcomes for the church.
Undesirable Consequences
Maintaining harmony in church is something that we do not avoid. If a church only knows how to use secular management ideologies, public relation methods or plain avoidance, the Christians whom have past or present relationship issues may find it difficult to communicate and thus may lead to the following consequences.
1. We form permanent cliques. Our fellowship started a prayer programme where everyone gets to pray with different people in the group. We may soon have to split the fellowship into permanent small groups of twos and threes. If every dispute leads to cliques, we will probably produce more breakaway cliques than the number of newborn babies in our church.
2. When we take sides, form “exclusive groups”, we ostracize people based on our will, and not God’s will of unity. That is unloving behavior.
3. We Ignore the Bible’s commands to confess our sins and reconcile (James 5:16)
4. We become Satan’s ambassador for disunity.
In truth, we are Christ’s ambassador’s for reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18-21). If church members like Calvin brings new friends along to church, the new friends would be able to sense the disunity, persistent conflict and clear divisions caused by people against him, instead of the love that testifies God living in us and that we know God (1 John 4:7-12). If I am a newcomer, I would be suspicious that Calvin’s church mates know the real gospel at all.
Just consider this: How is the church going to be Christ’s ambassador for the gospel, for men and women to be reconciled with God if the church is busy creating divisions? How can the church say they have the love and wisdom of God when the church leaders sometimes do not admit their mistakes, hide behind PR statements and refuse to resolve conflict with God’s wisdom?
While it is true Christians have to be forgiving towards each other, the leaders may persist in allowing conflict to form divisions in church. But unrepentant Christian leaders who refuse to show that they are sorry or reconcile people may run into more problems. Some secular management theories teach that “Leaders must never admit their mistakes when they are wrong”. When Christian leaders like Philip believe in that hype, we see problem number 5.
5. The members lose the trust and confidence in the leaders and members who create "exclusive groups".
Even some prominent public figures have learnt to apologise for mistakes. When will church leaders learn to be humble?
If churches continue to preach practical solutions like Philip, they have to know that style of management is hardly practical – they have found one solution in “avoidance at all costs”, yet they are blind to the byproduct of that solution – the five new problems as listed above. Trading one solution for five problems is hardly practical at all.
There is no love if the church persist in keeping people in conflict or awkward relationships at arms’ length. That will only deepen conflict and prejudice. In extreme cases, it may lead to feuds between families. The Bible’s stand on conflict is clear - Face it actively:
Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. (Matthew 5:23-24)
God has never told us “Avoid your brother who is in conflict with you and just focus on worship and ministry and PR methods. Judge problems on your wisdom without listening. Make sure people at previous conflict don’t meet at all. Leaders should not waste them on reconciliation.” No. The Bible is clear that reconciliation and fair judgement is part of his plan for us. And His plan is for us to face conflict, not avoid it like secular methods.
And James 3:17 tells us “the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.”
Truly, truly, God’s ways are infinitely better than ours. Yet, we often discard it in favour of our own ways. It is time that we return to the spirit of Sola Scriptura. When God says so, we do not say no.
We handle conflict with honesty. Not avoidance, not hiding behind PR statements, not speculating, not making judgments based on limited information – these are biased and hypocritical, and against James 3:17. If any of us is guilty of these methods, it would be difficult for the fellowship to attract people, ultimately leading to fellowship numbers dwindling. One of the key reasons for a lack of unity may simply lie with the unbiblical ways we handled conflict.
Conclusion ：
God has declared his version of communication and unity in the church. If we want to reconcile people, we do not need to deliberately separate them. Just let things be natural. We are called to live out John 13:34-35:
A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have loved one and another.
It is already awkward enough for people in previous conflicts to be loving like brothers and sisters in church. The more we purposely separate them, the harder it will be for them to reconcile. For a fellowship to be united, people who want to reconcile need the space and time to step out in courage towards each other.
Indeed we are called to fellowship in love as well as good works (Heb 10:24). In church, we may not add every member to our Facebook accounts, Google+ accounts, Whatsapp, etc , but we can at least do good works when we adhere to honest communication, more truthfulness and less forming of cliques for the church to be united in Christ’s measurements (Eph 4:13-15). Therefore, we got to be wary of exclusive groups and the lack of honest communication that prevents true unity.
Conflicts should be dealt with using the Bible as our standard for right and wrong. Secular PR methods and management theories do not make Christians perfect for God’s work. Only the Bible can prepare us thoroughly for good works (2 Tim 3:16-17)
If overzealous leaders worry about inconsequential things in conflicts, we are nowhere near the love and good works we should be displaying. Our fellowship will go nowhere. If people who had previous conflicts keep worrying about reconciliation, would it save them （Matthew 6:27）? Why worry, just do it.
Author’s Final Word
It was actually my wish to couple this article with an article on conflict. But I felt my article on conflict hasn’t encompass everything that can be discussed. Anyway, the draft is available at http://gabetoric.blogspot.com/2011/11/white-hair-massacre-of-conflict.html
Updated 12:12 am January 3, 2012
Updated 11:55 am January 3, 2012
Updated 10:37 am January 4, 2012
Updated 2:52 pm January 9, 2012
Updated 12:12 am January 3, 2012
Updated 11:55 am January 3, 2012
Updated 10:37 am January 4, 2012
Updated 2:52 pm January 9, 2012
0 comments:
Post a Comment