Healthy Ministry Relationships: Anonymous Communications
Healthy ministries begin with strong foundations. An important component in the healthy, strong church is healthy communications. Healthy communications are truthful, direct, and free of manipulative behaviors. Today, I am writing about an unhealthy type of communication—anonymous comments—and what to do about them.
What are anonymous communications?
Anonymous communications in churches can take many forms. It is not unusual for a pastor to receive anonymous, “helpful” comments in the offering plate. “Pastor, your sermon today was too long!” or “Please don’t wear that color vestments again—that color doesn’t look good on you!” These are judgmental statements that sting the pastor’s ego and do nothing to improve ministry relationships in the church.
Another common form of anonymous communication is the “in your best interest” comment: “I’m only telling you this for your own good-- some people in the church think it best that you move on.” or “You know I am one of your strongest supporters in the church, but there are many parents who don’t feel like you care about the children.”
And then there are unhealthy comments that lay leaders too often hear: “People I have been talking to think you should hold church board meetings on Saturdays rather than on Tuesday evenings.” or “I was talking on the phone to a few people last night about the budget and we all think we are paying the custodians too much money. Everyone knows they do the bare minimum around here.”
Helpful anonymous comments are anything but helpful. Their intended effect is two-fold: 1) put the receiver of the comment on the defensive; and 2) gain power for one’s one opinion through the power of the unidentified multitude. To the recipient of the comment, it is like playing Blind Man’s Bluff; you are totally left in the dark to swat at an attacker you can’t identify or contain.
How do anonymous comments disrupt ministry relationships?
Anonymous communications are a dishonest attempt at issue resolution. They are dishonest, because they rarely have the backing they claim. Often the opinion is held by one person, and then is pushed onto others so as to create the appearance of consensus. Many times, the proponent of the comment has no other backing at all. Sensing a power differential in the church, the speaker attempts to narrow the gap with anonymous, non-existent support.
Both kinds of communication are a form of bullying and bullying another to get your way is never healthy. The bully might be successful in the short run, but in the longer view, the bad feelings created by this tactic will create unhealthy and unbalanced relationships built on fear, distrust, and intimidation. A pastor or lay leader who is bullied by anonymous communications will not feel free to be creative, expressive, or relational. The natural reaction for a church leader in the face of a bully is to shut down, avoid contact, and self-judge.
Self-judgment is the worst part of the anonymous comment syndrome. Because there is no one else in the conversation, there is a tendency to feel indicted, convicted, and displayed in shackles in the public square:
“Is this how they all feel about me?”
“I guess I won’t wear that stole again if everything thinks it is ugly.”
“I better change the board meeting date so that people don’t get mad at me and want to vote me out as leader.”
“I really don’t have time to take on teaching Sunday School to the children, but if all the parents think I don’t care about the children, it’s up to me to show that I do.”
For a ministry system to be strong and healthy, communications need to be above-board, identified, and transparent.
How should the healthy pastor or lay leader respond to anonymous comments?
The best way to handle anonymous comments is to shut them down as soon as they are uttered. This is a two-step process. First is to ask the declarer, “Who exactly is saying this? Name names, please.” This question will almost never result in a direct answer; it is far more likely that the speaker will claim that the others are afraid to come to the pastor or lay leader directly, or that the speaker can’t remember “all the people who said it.” No matter, for the next response is not defensive, but simply states the policy of the church and its leaders to support transparent, identified concerns, not anonymous comments. “I don’t listen to anonymous comments, Sue, because I can’t address them directly and they are not healthy for the church.”
Clergy and lay leadership need to stand together, firmly, in stopping this destructive behavior in their congregation. If either allows it to take hold in their church system, or if either use it against the other, an unhealthy situation develops. To be effective in their ministry relationship, lay leaders and pastors need to be above-board and transparent with each other. The anxious environment that is created by a tyranny of the minority can derail an otherwise successful and supportive relationship. Being clear with congregants and other leaders in rejecting anonymous comments encourages people to use their own voice and discourages bullies from getting a toehold onto an unhealthy ministry relations practice.
What is the simple takeaway lesson?
Be clear. Be consistent. Be concise when faced with anonymous communications. Throw them away if they are written and do not give them any value. If they are spoken to you, use the tools you now have to stop them before they get any traction. Remember: healthy ministry relationships start with you.
Available Resources:
I teach a basic workshop on Healthy Ministry Relationships, one of the components of which is Healthy Communication. This topic is also available as a stand-alone workshop. See my RESOURCES page for more information.
I am also available for hourly consultation with pastors, lay leaders, and churches on this and other HMR (healthy ministry relationships) issues.
(c) Tracey Dawson, 2020