Should We Use The Word “Demonic” To Describe Church Conflict?

Have you ever been part of a church where the actual power structure was different than the stated power structure? This happened in a church I served early in my career.

In accordance with Presbyterian polity, we elected a Session of nine elders and a board of six deacons. On paper, the church was governed by these officers.

In reality, however, decisions were always made by one of two people. If the matter was related to finances or property, whatever “Mr. Taylor” said was the way the Session would vote. He would make his feelings known in Sunday school, and the current elders never voted against his wishes.

“Mrs. Dorothy” lived in the local nursing home, and she would send her directives on all other church matters through her brother, who served on the Session. Mrs. Dorothy had been the matriarch of the church for several decades, a role she had inherited from her aunt - one of the church’s charter members. 

To an outsider, this discrepancy in actual vs. stated roles could be very 
confusing. I spent a couple of frustrating years watching all my ideas get voted down, before I learned to get either Mr. Taylor or Mrs. Dorothy on board before making a proposal to Session.

In that church, the system worked, because everyone in the organization understood it. They were comfortable with the matriarchal/patriarchal system and the family feel to power dynamics.There was no confusion over roles, only the occasional eye rolling at the young pastor and his silly attempts to follow the denominational rules.

In other churches and organizations, however, a difference between  stated roles and actual roles can become unhealthy and divisive. In these cases, members inside the group are often unaware of who holds the effective decision making authority.

This happened in another church served by a colleague of mine. A small group of five (two Session members, two other church members, and a former pastor who still lived in the area) usurped much of the power. They conspired to influence Session votes and turn the congregation against the legitimate pastor. In the meantime, the former pastor continued to perform many functions such as hospital visits and weddings - a strict “no-no” under Presbyterian policy. He even held secretive Bible studies in his home.

It was only a matter of time before the church erupted in confusion and chaos. Accusations were made. Feuding camps developed. Session meetings became tense battlegrounds as the legitimately elected leaders struggled to discern who was actually wielding power and fulfilling roles. The legitimate pastor suffered a nervous breakdown and resigned, and several families left the church.

In other churches, there might not be an explicit conspiracy, but a similar type of conflict emerges because the stated roles do not line up with who is actually wielding authority. This is the much more common situation, as a small group of power brokers or a few competing interest groups operate outside of the formal decision making process, confusing the membership and creating distrust. 

Skilled pastors will spend time during their first year or two observing these dynamics and working to eliminate this confusion of roles, so all church members feel confident in the integrity of the decision-making process - even if they don’t agree with all decisions.  Inexperienced pastors often get sucked into the unhealthy dynamics, forget their own appropriate role in the system, and make matters even more confusing and conflicted. 

The key concept here is “integrity of roles.” In any healthy organization, people function according to clearly stated and well-defined roles that all members of the group understand. When they fall out of line with their roles and try to wield undue power, there is a system in place for correction and restoration. 

As part of this new blog, I am taking the confusion of roles and abuses of power described here and calling them “demonic.” This might raise a few eyebrows for those who associate demons with concepts such as evil and Satanic, and who are not willing to put such labels on churches and church members who behave poorly.

But as I outlined in the previous post, “demonic” at its essence refers to a process or a force that confuses and divides. Certainly, many church folks have witnessed the devastating speed at which such a force can destroy the unity of a congregation or a larger church body. I believe using the word can help us better understand church dynamics and more effectively prevent conflict.

In the next post, I will turn this concept of demonic confusion to the individual personality, and examine how internal division in a single personality can be contagious and lead to division in families and groups where that individual holds power. 

This is where I feel I might have some original ideas to help us understand the current confused and divided state of our church and culture.