Lying, White-anting & Blocking in the Church: What to do when your relationship with a church gatekeeper fails
Paper Jewels, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
What if, no matter how hard you try, the gatekeeper you’re dealing with, blocks your every effort? Gatekeepers serve an essential function in church life, and working successfully with them is a priority,[i] but sometimes, everything a minister or leader tries, fails. Every idea is resisted. Every innovation is blocked even though the majority of the congregation have agreed to it.
Some gatekeepers can get nasty if they think you are spoiling their method of doing things. And if you are employed by the church, you are more vulnerable than a volunteer. The gatekeeper can write letters to Presbytery and Synod to try and get rid of you, sometimes with regrettable success.
Lying
The minister named wanted to change the way the worship roster was organised so that roles in significant worship events such as Easter and Christmas Day were shared around more equitably. The worship coordinator agreed. Shortly afterwards, a rumour spread that the minister had forced the change through – a complete lie.
Being lied about is painful and difficult for ministers and leaders. Why does it happen?
Social psychologists tell us that people in all kinds of organisations, including the church, lie about the leader if the leader changes the way things are done. According to studies, the motivation behind their lies is anger, the only emotion known to create this behaviour.
White-anting
In the face of financial difficulties, a rural church held a congregational meeting in which they decided to hire out the hall to a local school during the week. Despite this being a majority group decision, two members who were outvoted, decided they would not cooperate. They quietly worked on the other church members to create doubt about the decision and thus were able to undo the original decision.
This practice is known as white-anting. It is so called because, like real white ants, it does not occur openly but happens in the dark; in quiet secretive conversations. For example:
The writer has experienced this phenomenon in a secular setting at one of her places of employment. Each week there was a formal staff meeting where decisions were made openly and formally. Then two or three staff members would meet privately in the corridor or in their offices, and reverse the decisions. This meant that some staff followed the formal instructions and some followed the new informal decisions. This created chaos. It came to an end when the process of white-anting was openly discussed in the staff meeting. When this practice was brought to the light, it ceased.
Blocking New Programs & Ideas
The editor of the church newsletter was asked by Church Council to include information about a new weekly program. As it upset the formatting of the newsletter, he simply failed to do so.
In another example, the congregation met extensively to find a new way of connecting with the local community. There was to be a weekly community meal. The gatekeepers of the church kitchen blocked this project at every turn. They were joined in their efforts by the finance committee who resisted spending any money on new equipment. It was years before a much-modified program was instituted.
Gatekeepers wield considerable influence in a church and can use their position to undo legitimate decisions not to their liking.
What can be done?
Key Strategies
In a research study of ministers, lay people and obstructive gatekeepers, several courses of action were identified:
Contact with Relevant Authorities
If the relevant staff in Synod and/or Presbytery know the leader’s perspective on the current conflict, the staff are in a better position to understand why the difficulties have arisen, and will be more able to take a balanced view. Too often ministers and leaders are targeted as the problem, and then removed at the point of greatest chaos, just before the positive new changes take effect. (The change process will be further discussed in a future blog.) Synod needs a clear understanding of the situation so they don’t inadvertently remove the wrong person.
Replacement of Gatekeeper
- One minister in the research study on gatekeepers, encouraged other more competent people to stand for election.
- Resignation of Gatekeeper
- This may be voluntary. Often people are very happy to resign. They are only keeping the position because they feel they have no choice.
- Resignation may be assisted. One minister asked some gatekeepers to resign in favour of younger people. They agreed and there was a service of thanks for their years of work.
- Reducing the gatekeeper’s power by loosening their hold over the congregation.
One minister in the study calmly persisted with the changes, risking the gatekeeper’s considerable wrath. Eventually, the wrath died down and the changes persisted. The minister said that the church members noticed that ’the sky did not fall in’. They then gained the courage to make further necessary changes without so much fear of the gatekeeper. The gatekeeper, observing this turn of events, and sensing a diminution of their power, became a great deal more cooperative.
Conclusion
Hopefully, the measures outlined above are not an everyday occurrence. Developing a good working relationship with the church gatekeepers is the most desirable course of action. Working in partnership with these valuable and essential church leaders enables ministers and others to help the local church move closer to living the reality of the Body of Christ in today’s world.
[i] See blog post: 9 Tips for Helping your Church Gatekeepers become Allies
