It’s Thursday night at USD, and students are mingling at InterVarsity’s large-group meeting. Over the year, the group has grown from 60 to about 100 people each week. With so many new faces, the leaders are intentional about saying hello to everyone, new and old. They make an effort to approach newcomers and introduce themselves, usually asking what year they are in school, along with a few other casual questions.

Then they reach that awkward pause, that place in the conversation where small talk has reached its end. Now the choice is whether to dive in deep, or bail. Four times out of five, these well-intentioned leaders choose the safe way out. With a smile and their best wishes, they move on to talk with someone they know. After a while, there are small clumps of friends around the room who are having a wonderful time conversing. But there are also the wandering free particles, those adrift without a group who are wondering if they should stay or leave. We began to wonder: is our chapter friendly or cliquish?

When our chapter had a burst of new growth last year, we wanted to be a healthy, clique-free community. But it wasn’t easy. Our core group of students doubled and became much stronger. Many formed tight friendships. We tried to get new people connected in our community, but sometimes people felt left out of the group, even after being involved in the chapter for a while. For example, one small-group leader regularly skipped the leadership meetings because she felt that she didn’t belong there. She didn’t know many of the other leaders well and was intimidated by them, thinking they weren’t open to her.

We tried to evaluate the problem. Did our chapter have a clique-mentality? Was their an inside group forgetting and overlooking those on the outside? Were some people really being excluded? Or was there another side to the issue?

As we looked closely at what was happening within the chapter, we saw several sides to this problem. First, we saw many loving, friendly, open students who tended to hang out with their friends and would unintentionally forget to include others. There was no obvious line between those perceived as inside or those feeling outside, so how one related to the group depended greatly on how one saw oneself. Those who were confident and bold enough to initiate relationships with perceived insiders were soon included. Most of these insiders, though, didn’t see themselves as “inside” anything; they struggle with the same insecurities and fears that keep outsiders from coming into the group.

We also saw occasions where those perceived to be on the inside made attempts to welcome others and expand the circle, only to have their invitations go unheeded. There were also those on the fringe who became apathetically disgruntled; they felt left out but were too shy, insecure or proud to speak up.

Finally, we found some people who perceived exclusive groups where there simply were none. It seems they were reading their own insecurities and loneliness into a friendly, open setting. We didn’t find any malicious or intentional cliques within our chapter.

To begin to address this issue of feeling outside of the group, we talked with other student leaders who we thought would be most sensitive to this issue. We looked together at our chapter members’ inside/outside perceptions, and then asked them to reach out to newcomers and people on the fringe. All were receptive, even if they didn’t fully grasp that they were seen as insiders.

Then, with all the chapter leaders, we talked about the basis for our community: unlike other campus groups, where students are bound together merely by a common interest or purpose, we are bound together because we serve the same Lord, Jesus Christ. This is a radically different picture of community. Therefore we can (and must) relate to people we wouldn’t normally spend time with, because Jesus has given us the common ground we otherwise lack. That’s not to say it’s easy to build on this foundation; however, we have been given the promise (and command) of being a unified body, so we must head in that direction.

We also encouraged some of those who saw themselves on the outside to respond to invitations and initiate relationships, even though this would be very difficult. Although it’s much easier for those who feel included to initiate (since they seem to have the social power), solving this problem is the whole community’s responsibility, so the whole community must participate.

Our chapter is changing. Our leaders realize it’s a problem when people feel left out at our gatherings. Because of their growing kingdom-building perspective, they’ve started to sacrifice some of their personal time with friends to hang out with people on the fringe. We’ve taken risks in our leadership team to invite some of those who are on the fringe to see the group differently. And a few students have decided to sacrifice their personal comfort and remain on the leadership team to help our chapter open up more from the inside. With growing momentum, our students are striving to bring others into the inside, not just socially but eternally.

—Kate Vosburg is in her third year of InterVarsity staff ministry at USD, after volunteering for a year at her alma mater, Williams College. She’s also in her third year of marriage to Dave, an IV alum. They enjoy the paradise-like setting of San Diego by picnicking, playing soccer and frisbee, and visiting the zoo.