Over the last four decades, political polarization in the United States steadily intensified. While most visible at the national level, its effects ripple outward—straining families, communities, and congregations. Yet polarization is not the greatest threat. More dangerous yet is the path from polarization to radicalization—when some individuals or groups embrace violent means to achieve their ends. Congregations must do what we can to mitigate this process.
In When the Center Does Not Hold, my colleagues and I defined polarization as the process by which more and more people move toward the extremes, leaving fewer in the middle. Radicalization, by contrast, involves adopting violence or coercion to impose one’s convictions. Polarization fractures lives and relationships-radicalization destroys them. Research from the Center for International and Strategic Studies shows that both the extreme right and the extreme left in the US have employed violent plots and attacks in recent years, with extreme-right incidents proving more deadly.
A particularly destructive cycle is what researchers call “reciprocal radicalization,” where violence from one side provokes retaliation from the other, feeding mutual dehumanization and a spiral of revenge. This pattern has torn apart nations, leading to ongoing internal violence or even a civil war. While the US has not reached that point, congregational leaders dare not be bystanders to a downward national spiral.
Most religious leaders are not trained to directly counter violent extremism. But they are entrusted with cultivating communities where polarization is diminished and where radicalization cannot take root. Congregations remain among the few spaces in American life where people of diverse political, cultural, and generational backgrounds still gather. This makes them uniquely positioned to nurture practices of respect, trust, and shared humanity. Such cultures do not emerge on their own. They are shaped by leadership.
Leadership Traits That Counter Polarization
Traditional leadership models are inadequate in an age of polarization. In 2018, leadership guru John Maxwell proposed core traits for those called to lead in an age of polarization, including these four:
Clarity. In times of division, clarity is critical. Leaders must be clear about their values, convictions, and commitments. Ambiguity only deepens mistrust. As Brené Brown observes, “Clear is kind. Unclear is unkind.”
Compassion. Clarity must be paired with compassion. Clarity without compassion hardens into rigidity. Compassion without clarity devolves into appeasement. But together, clarity and compassion allow leaders to speak truthfully while listening deeply—modeling trust across differences.
Courage. Congregational life inevitably reflects broader social tensions. Leaders need courage to name realities that some would rather avoid, and to resist pressure to keep the peace at all costs. Courage allows leaders to take principled stands while respecting those who disagree.
Connection. At the heart of effective leadership is connection—first to one’s own values and emotions, and then to the lives and beliefs of others. Connection prevents isolation, nurtures empathy, and sustains community even in conflict.
When leaders integrate clarity, compassion, courage, and connection, they model how to be both rooted and relational. They can articulate their own convictions without demanding uniformity, and they can invite others to do the same. This, in turn, creates a congregational culture where every disagreement is accompanied by a high regard for the dignity of each person.
Building a Healthy Congregational Subculture
Leaders set the tone in every system—from a family to a country. Clergy and lay leaders who embody these traits help shape a congregational subculture distinct from the polarized culture outside its walls. Such a community nurtures dignity and respect, condemns violence and dehumanization, and practices the discipline of staying connected amid differences.
American history shows that polarization is not a new phenomenon. The Revolution, the Civil War, and the upheavals of the 1960s and 70s all brought deep division and expressions of violence. Each period tested congregations, and each left scars. But in every case, congregations endured and often became places of healing.
Today’s congregational leaders face a similar challenge. The task is not to eliminate national polarization but to create resilient congregational cultures—communities where polarization finds no foothold. By nurturing healthy selves, healthy relationships, and healthy systems, congregations can become what my colleague Larry Peers calls “Greenhouses of Hope.”
Polarization and radicalization will eventually subside, as past waves have. Until then, the calling of congregational leadership is clear: to preserve community, limit the damage, and bear witness to a way of life rooted in clarity, compassion, courage, and connection.
Note: This article was drafted by the author and edited using ChatGPT.
David Brubaker has consulted with organizations and congregations in the U.S. and a dozen other countries on organizational development and conflict transformation. He is the author of Promise and Peril, on managing change and conflict in congregations, and When the Center Does Not Hold, on leading in an age of polarization. David recently retired from his role as Dean of the School of Social Sciences and Professions at Eastern Mennonite University, and is now a Professor Emeritus of Organizational Studies.
Books by David Brubaker
