[00:00:00.000]
Welcome to Episode 283 of The Non-Anxious Leader Podcast. I'm Jack Shitama. Before we get into today's episode, I want to remind you that if you want more resources on how to be a non-anxious presence, you can subscribe to my Two for Tuesday newsletter. I'll put a link in the show notes, or you can go to thenonanxiousleader.com. If you have a question or an idea for a future episode, episode, you can email me at jack@christian-leaders.com. The idea for today's episode comes from fellow podcaster Reverend Lauren Richmond Jr, host of the Future Christian podcast. He emailed me with a reference to an article by a colleague of his, Dennis Sanders, who wrote, Can We Just Coexist? I'll put a link to that and to the Future Christian podcast in the show notes. Sanders's article talks about how the US is becoming a nation of affinity groups, whether that's a denomination, political party, advocacy group, or a group of hobbyists.

[00:01:41.770]
This is happening as we are becoming more and more diverse, perhaps even because of this, and he wonders whether it is even possible to be a so-called big tent where we can agree to disagree. Sanders cites two things in particular that got his attention. First, my own denomination, the United Methodist Church, recently removed any language prohibiting the ordination of LGBTQ persons, as well as the officiating and hosting of same-sex weddings. What's notable about this is that even while this allows for greater inclusion, it doesn't require it. In fact, there was a coalition of centrists and moderate progressives who resisted the left wing's efforts to include language that would require full inclusion. The idea is, at least for the United Methodist Church would remain a big tent where people could follow their own conscience regarding ordination and same-sex ceremonies. This was important in gaining the support of more conservative members who had not left the denomination. And while support wasn't unanimous, each of the measures passed with well above a super-majority. The second event was a proposal by a group within the Presbyterian Church USA or PC USA to move forward towards full inclusion of LGBTQ persons by including gender identity and sexual orientation as classes that are protected from discrimination.

[00:03:08.890]
The PC USA removed harmful language and ended up with a split over a decade ago. At the time of the split, the remaining PCUSA was a so-called big tent. In theory, protecting gender identity and sexual orientation from discrimination makes sense. I believe in this, and I believe in full inclusion exclusion. However, as Sanders notes, this could lead to a situation where a traditional interpretation of the Bible on human sexuality might no longer be tolerated. In essence, the PC USA would become a smaller tent, if not an affinity group. Lauren Richmond rightly points out that in many ways, this highlights the tension between self-definition and emotional connection between individuality and community, between the right of one versus the common good. He also notes that Dennis Sanders is a gay black man who supports full inclusion. Yet, Sanders astutely notes that efforts to do this can and likely would exclude. It's not an easy situation. It's complicated. This is a lengthy introduction to this topic, but I think it's important to provide some context. The question remains, why can't we all just get along? And what can we do about I'm guessing the reason you listen to this podcast is to get family systems insights, so I'm going to give you my take from what I believe to be a family systems perspective.

[00:04:43.520]
First, it's important to recognize the difference between emotional process and content. In the case that the US and likely much of our industrialized world, if not the entire world, is fracturing into affinity groups, I believe Edwin Friedmann would say that this is due to a lack of self-differentiated leadership. When this happens, surrounding togetherness pressure starts to rule. A self-differentiated, non-anxious leader is able to say what they believe while giving others the freedom to disagree. It's the latter part that seems to be missing these days. When that happens, it's not a far stretch to exclude anyone who doesn't agree. We see this, especially with political parties today, and it occurs mostly on the extremes, both left and right, progressive and conservative. It's process, not content. If you're not with us, you are against us. There's no room for difference, no room for nuance, no room for healthy emotional space. In a climate like this, you are likely leading through self-differentiation when you get people from both sides mad at you. Why? Because you are taking a non-anxious stand on what you believe without pandering to your own cause nor excluding those who disagree with you. The key then is to remain a non-anxious presence, to remain non-anxious and to be present emotionally, especially with those who are upset, to stay emotionally connected.

[00:06:15.340]
This leads to another aspect of emotional process that's important to understand, and that's a conflict of wills. When you are trying to convince another that you are right and they are wrong, they will almost certainly push back. Research shows that they will not only resist, but they will actually entrench or harden their position. A conflict of wills destroys a healthy emotional space because it attempts to define the other instead of giving them the freedom to define themselves. The challenge we have as a society these days is that we feel so passionate about our beliefs that we can't express them in healthy ways without demanding that others get on board. Non-anxious leaders intentionally work a bigger tent because they understand that people need to learn to define themselves in healthy ways. They only do that when the leader does it first without demanding agreement or, worse yet, obedience. The question is, how do we go about doing this? I looked to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, who led the largest change movement in my lifetime. Dr. King said that politicians are always sticking their finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing.

[00:07:29.660]
He wisely noted that rather than try to change the politician, you instead try to change the wind. This is what non-anxious leaders do. It's important to note that even though the civil rights movement ended legal discrimination, it didn't eliminate racism. It's hard to say how things would be different if he hadn't been assassinated, but I believe he was a powerful example of leadership through self-differentiation, and we would likely have gotten further in moving toward a more just and equitable society if he had remained living and leading as a non-anxious presence for longer. All that said, the question remains, what can you do to change the wind, to enlarge the tent, and to lead a healthy family organization, congregation, community? It goes back to Lauren's original question, learn to hold the tension between self-definition and emotional connection, which means the tension between individuals and community. I have a friend from church who's not happy about the changes in the United Methodist Church, yet he's still there. For him, our community is more important than that particular change. Would it do any good to demand he agree? Would it help to exclude him for his position? I don't think so.

[00:08:49.690]
To me, the thing that non-anxious leaders do best is they rally people around a common purpose that transcends difference. That's what Dr. King did. I believe that if you want to facilitate a bigger tent, then find that purpose. For me, in my denomination, I think that's spreading the grace and love of God. In fact, I believe we do this best when we show the world that we can still work together despite our differences. And if you believe passionately in your principles, give space to those who disagree, even as you remain emotionally connected by showing you care for them as a person. Check out episodes 276 and 277 on how to deal with resistance by calling people forward instead of calling people out. For more on that. It seems our world is a mess. Anxious leaders outnumber non-anxious leaders by huge margins. Yet I believe in the power of a non-anxious presence. I pray that you do, too. That's it for episode 283. Don't forget, you can connect with me at thenonanxiousleader.com and you can email me at jack@christian-leaders.com. If you have found this episode helpful, please leave a rating on your podcast platform of choice and share this with someone who might also benefit. Until next time. Thanks and goodbye.