Conviction Tempered by Mercy

When our team was recruiting pastors to participate in the Congregations and Polarization Project, we intentionally sought out individuals who would represent a range of theological, social, and political perspectives. Our project does not seek to spark debates about the issues themselves, but to examine how pastors with varying convictions on polarizing issues experience and address those issues within their congregations.

While we were genuinely curious how a group representing much of the sociopolitical spectrum would approach these conversations, we were also confident that thoughtful pastors who willingly joined our study would navigate contentious issues in compassionate ways. Each time we gather our Affinity Group members, we are rewarded for our confidence and reminded of the respect they hold for one another.

In one of our sessions, we broke the pastors into groups based on which sociopolitical topic they identified as the most animating or concerning in their congregations: economic inequality, immigration, and LGBTQ+ issues. Groups were assembled based on the topics at hand, rather than stances on the issues, allowing for pastors with more liberal and conservative perspectives to share their insights and experiences across difference.

Within the group who identified issues relating to the LGBTQ+ community as their top concern, we asked the pastors to give examples of how and when these issues arose in their congregations. A pastor from a small, suburban congregation that is open-and-affirming told the group about a funeral her congregation hosted for a trans youth who was a member.

She explained that hosting the funeral challenged some of her members because “it required openness to [the youth’s] extended network that was from a much different theological place and not comfortable” in the congregation. Some individuals who would be attending the funeral to celebrate the youth’s life and mourn their passing might not agree with her church’s inclusive stances on gender and sexuality.

She said her congregation “had to check some of their own hospitality and be ready for part of the community who wanted to honor this family but were not necessarily ascribed to the theology [the congregation was] sharing.” That proved to be difficult for members of the congregation as some wanted to approach the situation with gentleness while others wanted to “say everything,” even if it might offend their guests. Ultimately, she said her congregation chose to take the gentle approach.

This pastor’s story reminded another pastor in the group of a similar situation his congregation faced, also involving a funeral and a member of the LGBTQ+ community. This pastor was also from a small, suburban congregation, but not an open-and-affirming one. His congregation’s stance on gender and sexuality came from a conservative theological place. As he put it, he and the female pastor who told the first story were “on very different sides of the exact same situation.”

His example was about a senior member of his church who passed away, and the only family member she had left was her grandson, who was in a homosexual relationship. The woman and her grandson were close, and the grandson wanted to speak at the funeral.

The pastor said that, although he was immediately fine with that, some members of his church were not. He explained, “But I let him speak, and he was great. It was an opportunity for us on the other side of the spectrum to show hospitality and care for [her] family in the midst of a difficult situation.” Even though his congregation was settled on their stances regarding LGBTQ+ issues, the pastor felt that “circumstances and situations like this will challenge [the congregation] and cause us to face real people and real matters, not just distant things that are in the news cycle.”

Taken together, these two brief stories illustrate the ways in which polarization is often confronted by perspective. A polarizing issue can seem very black-and-white when it is hypothetical or when it is being discussed on a national stage, but once the issue manifests in the form of a real person or a real situation in our community or standing right in front of us, it becomes more complex and may compel conversations, perspectives, and reactions to shift.

In these two examples, the pastors both sought to close the realized—if not often perceived—distance between members of their congregation and the broader community. In doing so, they exhibited qualities we have seen frequently in our year of conversations: people entering into discussions about potentially difficult, potentially divisive topics with patience, open minds and hearts, and—not least of all—empathy.

The nature of congregational life is always, to some degree, about truth and doctrine. But congregations are also communities of mutual care and support, even for people who may not be members and who do not share the same doctrines. In many cases, the generative tension between these two frequently competing values provides opportunities for outreach and discipleship—two core tenets for many churches—that, ideally, lead to a less polarized and more empathetic world.