Should I Stay or Should I Go?
My experience as an American has given me the impression that loyalty is expected, except when it’s not, that choosing to leave is disloyal, except when it’s not, and those who protest should shut up or leave, except when it has worked out nicely for Americans to stay and complain.
For many of us, our country, our religion, and even our current occupations come out of seemingly disloyal protests and exit from a system we could no longer support or endure. The United States of America was once a colony of Great Britain – until that colonization became to stifling and our protests were ignored and we “left.” For those of us who are not Catholic, our religious affiliation was born out of protest and exit. I mean, we even call ourselves Protestants. And is there any one among us who has never left a job because it was no longer “a good fit?”
Exit, Voice, and Loyalty, by Albert Hirschman, provides a common sense look at how exit, voice, and loyalty interact in American economics and organizations. I say it’s a common sense look because it does not take a degree in applied economics to understand that a capitalist economy revolves around keeping customers from “exiting,” by either building their loyalty (making it hard for them to leave even if they want to), or by taking expressed concerns and dissatisfaction to heart and improving goods and services (voice). But I don’t really want to talk about economics.
I suppose I could bring Hirschman’s thoughts to bear on our current political climate. We live in an extraordinary time where there are new protests every day. There are protests against the government and governing systems, there are protests against the economic powers that be, and there are protests against the protesters. Amidst these protests, one can always hear the taunt, “If you don’t like the way it is, you can always leave!” Leaving is seen in some situations as more loyal, or at least more acceptable, than voice. But I don’t really want to talk about politics either.
What I want to ponder is how exit, voice, and loyalty work within our churches. I am totally approaching this from my own point of view and in no way could ever assume to understand how these things interact within every denomination or faith community. What I have seen, however, is a tendency towards exit within the church denominations and communities of which I have been a part. My first tendency is to say that there is little loyalty in churches anymore. People rarely speak up when there is a problem (except for those few “squeaky wheels” who, shall we say, relish the use of their voice), but simply choose not to return. Some call this a consumeristic approach to church, where “church shopping” is a real thing, and people struggle to commit. But reading through Hirschman, I was struck by the idea that our churches do not honor the use of voice as a hallmark of loyalty. Again, speaking only for those churches which I have been a part of, I get the feeling that speaking against decline in the church or denomination is actually seen as disloyal and that many leaders would rather those who are speaking up leave if they can’t keep from rocking the boat. Why is that? Why do we not choose to see that someone who cares about the health of our church community will obviously speak up when they see an issue that will cause decline?
I don’t know the answer to that question for sure, but I am beginning to wonder if it is a little like someone refusing to go to the doctor when they suspect there is something wrong with their body. At some level, the fear that the doctor will expose the issue and, naturally, put in place a plan for healing that may involve more pain, is enough to push us in to denial. If we ignore it, maybe it will go away on its own. Another way to think about it is this: if I developed a small rash on my face would I rather my friend suggest I get it looked at, especially if they had seen something like it before, or just ignore it? And if that rash later turned to something serious, would I feel like my friend had been disloyal for not telling me they were concerned? I know that’s a pretty simplistic example, but it seems to fit every church community of which I have been a part. Something small that could be treated turns into a festering wound that requires major treatment and sometimes that treatment has not been enough to save the community.
So here is my question: if protest and exit are the “American way,”[1] what is the Kingdom way? When should loyalty speak up and when should it be silent? And is there ever a time when exit is best for all considered?
[1] Albert O. Hirschman, Exit Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970), 106. Hirschman notes,“Exit has been accorded an extraordinarily privileged position in the American tradition, but then, suddenly, it is wholly proscribed, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse from a few key situations.
About the Author
Kristin Hamilton
6 responses to “Should I Stay or Should I Go?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Kristin, what a profound statement: “But reading through Hirschman, I was struck by the idea that our churches do not honor the use of voice as a hallmark of loyalty.” It is something we miss all too often, a healthy voice IS a form of loyalty! Thank you for making that point.
YES Kristin! My experience as well: “speaking only for those churches which I have been a part of, I get the feeling that speaking against decline in the church or denomination is actually seen as disloyal and that many leaders would rather those who are speaking up leave if they can’t keep from rocking the boat. Why is that? Why do we not choose to see that someone who cares about the health of our church community will obviously speak up when they see an issue that will cause decline?”
I think it’s becasue they are not well-differentiated as leaders or as a church and are unable to integrate alternate viewpoints. Integration is a sign of good mental and emotional health and I find many churches consider integrated thinking to be disloyal their doctrine or values. Therefore, they polorize their beliefs, making it challenging for different, less definte or defined beliefs to be accepted. In other words, who says we have to have all the answers to every issue or subject? Culture is dynamic and we need to learn to hold basic doctrinal beliefs and give room for ebb and flow in cultural shifts within the church ethos. That’s my 2 cents. What’s your thoughts?
Kristin this is a very thoughtful analysis of our current American dilemma in connection with the Hirschman text. The rash example was great. It is true we all would want to be given the heads up and a warning prior to it growing and causing more damage. The unfortunate reality is that this does not happen often enough. When it does happen people resort to becoming defensive instead of realizing that people have valid care and concern.
“what is the Kingdom way? ”
That’s the most important to us Kristin as we attempt to be good leaders. Can we be humble enough to listen to the members and be willing to change if we are shown where we are wrong?
I don’t know if you studied that part of Church history or not, but the Roman Catholics responded by tightening up their rules and calling the Protestants heretics. Too much to go into in a short space, but what if they would have said, “Dear Lord thank You for this wake-up call from our members and show us our errors and help us to right the wrongs”?
I guess we haven’t learned anything from history.
I think you are spot on. When people raise their voices, it is often perceived as complaining (and often in actuality is), especially when vocalizing about “change”–or the lack thereof. How do we distinguish between complaint and prophecy? (And by prophecy, I mean serious evaluation on the direction the organization is headed.)
Kristen
My response to your questions:
1) Jesus spoke in most situations and sometimes he remained silent. When he had done all he was required to do he exited.
2) Jesus spoke up when it was a teaching moment. When the Pharisees asked a trick question (one they thought we catch him) he wrote in the sand.
Jesus then spoke and said he who has not sinned through the first stone
3) When Jesus told the disciples, shake the sand off your sandals if they don’t want to hear you.