WHEN LEADERS FIGHT

 In his volume, A Knot of Vipers, Francois Mauriac (1885-1970), tells the story of an old man who spent the last decades of his marriage, in the same house, but down the hall from his wife. A rift opened 30 years earlier about whether the husband showed enough concern, when their five-year-old daughter took ill. Neither husband nor wife was willing to take the first step to bring healing. Every night they waited for each other to initiate an approach. Neither one would break the cycle that began decades earlier. Neither will forgive.

The absence of forgiveness kills joy and creates toxic relationships. If you doubt me, ask President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. After what appeared to be a cordial working relationship, Musk expressed his disagreement with the Congressional spending bill. He thought it was “a disgusting abomination”. That led to the two leaders trading fierce social barbs.

Thankfully, at the time of writing this commentary, the leaders began to soften their toxic rhetoric. The President was “open to reconciling” and Elon Musk had regrets for posts about the President. Hopefully, this toning down will lead to apologies about personal attacks. Whereas disagreeing with policy is okay, assassinating one’s character is unacceptable. That kind of warfare is unproductive and costly.

Since the public spat began, Musk’s Tesla stock price plunged by 14%, wiping out more than $150 billion from its market cap. The prospect of Musk’s SpaceX losing even some of its government contracts would hurt. Could a drawn-out fight mean that Trump would somehow hamstring Musk’s xAI even as he champions other American artificial intelligence companies? The truth is, should reconciliation fail, both men and many others will suffer greatly. 

If we could only give more thought to “the others who suffer greatly”, many of our conflicts will be resolved more speedily. Conflict resolution requires vulnerability, humility, truthfulness, respectful communication techniques, mutually beneficial collaboration and de-escalation techniques.

The apostle Paul recommended some of these conflict management principles when he responded to two church sisters who experienced conflicts  (Philippians 4:2-3). Paul’s wording would suggest that this was a personal disagreement or a clash of personalities. To mention the names of the conflicting women in a public letter, could suggest that the issue became a threat to the church.

The nature of Paul’s appeal for resolution further suggests the magnitude of the problem. He repeats the use of the verb beseech to ensure that each woman was appropriately addressed. His appeal was simple – “agree with each other.” In other words, be at one in your mental attitude. The women were allowing their differing opinions to affect their attitudes to each other. Their personal differences seemed to be more important than the welfare of others. In conflict management, personal differences must be balanced properly. Otherwise, our differences can undermine progress and stifle diversity and variety. For Paul, and hopefully for us, the welfare of others must remain primary in managing conflict.  

The victims in any conflict are usually more than the warring parties. The warring parties usually suspend the strengths that unite them and resort to behavior that divide. Paul used an athletic metaphor to describe how the women contended with him in ministry. Like in a tug-of-war game, they struggled together.  They had a common goal and achieved much. Contenders for the faith became contentious in behavior. That behavior was ruining their reputation and legacy. Their disagreement was also disrupting existing opportunities for ministry.

From his prison cell, Paul recommended three principles for resolving conflicts:

1. Look for impartial counselors;

2. Appeal to common bonds; and

3. If necessary, suffer personal loss, because of “those who will suffer greatly”.

In the interest of “those who will suffer greatly”,  it is preferred that we learn to forgive, and to practice using terms like “I am sorry “and “I apologize”. Recent research in the Social Sciences confirms that “forgiveness releases an offender from prolonged anger, rage and stress that have been linked to physiological problems, such as cardiovascular diseases, high blood pressure, hypertension, cancer and other psychosomatic illnesses.” And, never forget the biblical teaching, “if it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Romans 12:18).