My spiritual community, Olympia Friends Meeting (OFM) has split into three groups over a complex conflict involving social traumas, stigmas, and advocacy. That is a gross oversimplification, and it is the extent I will convey the content of the conflict. Rather, I will focus on an aspect of the conflict that was overshadowed by that content, and offer what I can to ease the suffering of other communities. I want to propose a process on which communities can iterate to both engage a conflict and support the mission of building peace.
As in most conflicts, the content of our conflict took center stage and demanded attention. Many bravely sought to engage the conflict and in doing so overlooked a key difference between people in our community. A Friend said that for some of us meeting is a place of hard work, “a crucible” of sorts, while for others it is a place of solace and renewal from which to engage in the challenges of our lives. We are both a crucible and a place of renewal, and our challenge is to not let either dominate the whole.
I find a metaphor in developmental psychology useful: the dynamic a child experiences between exploration and safety. If a child feels safe, they will explore, and when they become upset, they return to safety -their caregiver- to learn how to be with these big feelings that overwhelm. When safe again, the child returns to exploration better able to cope with their upsets.
We need both safety and exploration, solace and conflict, at different times and different circumstances and it is deeply traumatic when the place/person you go to for safety, reflection, and solace is the source of upset. When the place we go for the safety needed to reflect on the challenging aspects of life, become filled with judgement and outrage we are left bereft. It is too much to ask of a child, and I believe we shouldn’t expect it to be different for adults.
We need to respect that without careful capacity building, these two paths may not be compatible in the same space, and yet stay connected.
Separation
When a conflict has gone past mediation between individuals, and/or individuals insist on bringing a conflict to the whole meeting repeatedly, I propose the following process:
Individuals unable to bring their concerns to the whole meeting without disturbing its regenerative aspect (see below in Reconciliation) are asked to pause worshipping with the whole meeting and to worship with a smaller group for six months. The focus of this smaller worship group will be to understand the concern to the depth that it can be expressed in a way that affirms and bolsters the restorative aspect of the main meeting. Likewise the larger group would focus on how to express their need for restoration and solace in a way that affirms and bolsters the interest of justice and action of the smaller group.
Separation is painful. We can be intentional about both acknowledging the pain and why we are separating.
Those who are inclined toward the crucible path and are familiar with the individual(s) can engage their leading through worshiping in the small group without disrupting the main meeting. I hope that people will vote with their feet. If the small group show shows no sign of progress or growth, they will return to the main meeting as their energy dictates. Does it fuel you?
The separation process is not dissimilar form affinity groups used in Equity & Belonging work. Being in an identity group can allow for venting and vulnerability that would not be possible in a mixed group, without which genuine conversations of how to work across charged differences, are unlikely to happen in a group setting.
It is important that there be clarity around this process. Uncertainty is a trigger for many of us with trauma who will imagine the worst. How long will we separate before testing the waters together? How will we determine if we can rejoin each other, or need more time apart? What happens if one group dwindles to just one person? When/how do we decide to formally separate? What will our relationship be like if we do formally separate?
Connection
Communication between groups is essential, and there are many ways of organizing and fostering it. I will suggest some possibilities below, however I have a strong recommendation for the following:
- That there be travelers between groups that regularly report out their experiences in the other group.
- Travelers should limit their reports to their personal experiences, growth and learnings and are not to be “representatives” in any respect nor report on others behavior/experiance.
- Travelers should be selected based on their ability share their experiences in a manner that deepens the restorative qualities of worship.
- There should be at least one from each group and their ministry should be only in one direction. For example, Jim worships three times a month with group A and then once at group B, during which they speak as led of their experience in the group A. When Jim returns to worship with group A Jim will refrain from reporting on his experience while with group B.
Other possibilities to foster connection are reminders and queries. Openers/clerks could refer to our estranged Friends, speak to their own feelings toward them, asking to hold them in light, and to expectantly await ministry toward union.
Tools
While separation may be enough to reduce the heat of a conflict to allow for creativity, new tools will need to be adopted and practiced. I will recommend a set of tools that I believe will help people to seek the truth of others and to speak their own truths while deepening renewal and connection.
Affirmation
Chief among these is affirmation. This is best encapsulated by a quote from my spouse’s time in early childhood care, “Make the child right.” It is paradoxical, that agreeing with a person’s experience is the most effective first step in getting them to broaden their perspective. In the case of childcare, joining the child in their experience joyfully making a mess says, “I see you, and you are important enough for me to join you where you are.” This reassures and reaffirms the relationship, which makes them much more open as you gently guide them to others’ experience and their impact on the whole.
Agreeing with a person’s experience is not the same as agreeing with their decisions or behaviors; it is agreeing that their feelings and viewpoint make sense within their experience. As a very public LGBTQ+ activist Dylan Marron says,
“Empathy is not endorsement.”
The challenge of affirmation is that we are usually too emotionally triggered to do it when it would be most effective. This brings me to the second tool…
The Stoplight System
I first learned of the Stoplight System through my work with SeekHealing.org. The stoplight system helps to normalize emotionality and reduce its stigma. It also helps us to become more reflective of our emotional state and capacity from moment to moment.
- Green: I am present and open. I am curious, calm, creative, compassionate, connected, or confident.
- Yellow: I am distracted, but able to participate. I am not at my best, please ask me if I’m OK with participating or what would support my participation.
- Red: I am emotionally activated, Reactive, irritable or unable to listen. I need to self/co regulate before I can meaningfully participate.
Essentially, the greater our emotional state the less we have access to our higher functions like creativity, curiosity or compassion. Rather than assuming or idealizing that we are all green and can be rational people, let’s recognize that we vary in our capacities from moment to moment. In addition this normalizes emotional distraction and fosters self-compassion. I am seldom green. I can make an effort to center and get there, but it takes a moment. Likewise, when I am red, I know that it’s best to step away and self-regulate or ask for what I need to regulate (co-regulation).
Co-regulation
The new field of Social Health has given us a set of social practices that foster a feeling of authentic connection between people which also tends to move people toward Green. Here are five tools for co-regulation/connection (also learned via SeekHealing):
- Hold challenging conversations confidential: let others tell their own truth as they wish.
- Do not attempt to change their experience. Be with them where they are, not where you want them.
- Seek consent, ask permission for any of the following;
- Reflection, repeat back what hear said as accurately without interpretations, and ask “did I get it right?”
- Ask a curious question, something you honestly want more information about. Careful not to advise such as “have you tried…?”
- Share impact: “when I heard you talk about ‘x’ I felt ‘y’” keep the focus on the speakers experience.
Reflective Practice
Buying a saw will not make you a carpenter. You must practice and reflect on how well you achieved your intent, and what you might do differently next time. If the intention is to express our truth while deepening the sense of connection and well being in a group, then ask after every ministry, “do I feel more connected, calm, curious, etc?” Be authentic and share that as feedback. It’s your truth in the moment, and we can’t learn these skills without reflecting on our intentions and impacts together
These tools I have borrowed from pioneers in Social Health. Here’s a brief list of topics for further learnings:
- SeekHealing: Organization on the forefront of community-based treatment of mental health and substance bonding concerns.
- Dr. David Campt’s White Ally Toolkit
- Non-Violent Communication
- Values Based Leadership
- Empathy is not endorsement Ted Talk by Dylan Marron
Reconciliation
My hope is that this model of separation will give people the safety, motivation, and authentic feedback to develop new ways of expressing their concerns; that communication between the groups will soften an lead toward clarity, and unity incrementally. As members develop skills and model them we all learn new ways of being. Reconciliation does not mean reunification of the groups, but clarity in what we mean to each other and how we will relate in the future.