#10 The Twelve Most Important Questions You Will Ever Ask About Your Church: What is Our Process for Resolving Conflict?

Leadership

When I posted the introduction article to this series, I titled #10 as “What is our process for managing conflict?” I have updated this article to use the word “resolving” instead of “managing.” Virtually every organization, church or not, manages conflict in one way or another whether it is ignored, confronted, or resolved, each is a way of managing conflict. Resolving conflict is more difficult than managing it, but resolution provides a seedbed for renewed energy and creativity for an organization. The reader should note that I am painting the issue with a broad brush approach as each conflict will have its own specific issues that cannot be addressed herein.

Jesus Christ gave the Christians and the church a reconciliation process that many appear to neglect:

Matthew 18:15-17 (NKJV) ¹⁵ “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. ¹⁶ But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’
¹⁷ And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.

The reconciliation process flows in the following manner:

1. The first step of resolution is to have a one-to-one meeting of the offended parties with no outside parties involved. The original problem is often compounded when one or both parties talk to others about the incident, which tends to plant further seeds of discord. When people not involved in the original incident are “brought in” to the situation, they should politely encourage the offended party to meet one-to-one with the other person involved and not discuss it further with others. Triangulation must be avoided and discouraged.
   
2. If the one-to-one meeting fails to resolve the conflict then it is time to have a group session such as an intervention, but all parties must avoid escalating the conflict. The purpose is not to “gang up” on one person, but to seek unity, counsel, and provide accountability through the reconciliation. The hope is that all relationships are restored and even made stronger in love for one another.
   
3. The third step is often called “excommunication” and appears drastic. The point is that the faith community makes an attempt to encourage all parties to reconcile. If one or both refuse reconciliation efforts then fellowship is withdrawn with the hope that the loss of the loving association with the faith community along with conviction of God and conscience, the individual will ultimately seek reconciliation with the other offended party as well as the faith community and be fully restored.
   

The process does work and many Christians and churches have used it for generations, but many churches abandoned this biblical model for reconciliation during the 20^th century. Again, it seems we have become too smart to follow the simple instructions of the Bible.

Leaders should educate their church in the biblical reconciliation process before conflict erupts. This establishes it as the process so there are no surprises. Leaders must model the process in their own lives if they expect the church to adhere to it also.

Predictable Times of Conflict

In the book Mastering Conflict and Controversy Speed Leas identifies the ten most predictable times of conflict. Some of these may be surprising to many leaders:

1. Easter- at busy and stressful time in many churches.
   
2. Stewardship or fundraising campaigns and budget time.
   
3. Addition of new staff.
   
4. Change in leadership style.
   
5. The pastor’s vacation.
   
6. Changes in the pastor’s family.
   
7. Introduction of baby boomers into the church- I think this is reflective of a transition of power from one generation to the next which always creates conflict.
   
8. The completion of a new building.
   
9. Significant loss of membership- usually a result of the “blame game.”
   
10. Significant increase in membership.
    

How People Respond to Conflict

Ken Sande in his book, The Peacemaker: A Biblical Guide to Resolving Personal Conflict, has provided a useful process for conflict resolution which harnesses the biblical principles outlined above. A reading of his work will help leaders recognize how people respond to conflict. For instance, the conciliatory behavior includes 1) overlooking the offense, 2) discussion, 3) negotiation, 4) mediation, 5) arbitration, and 6) Church discipline. Peace Fakers resort to 1) denial, 2) flight, or 3) suicide. Peace Breakers resort to 1) litigation, 2) assault, or 3) murder. Sande’s model illustrates a slippery slope and how the failure of any or all parties to approach reconciliation properly can lead to drastic consequences.

Close the Side Doors

Church leaders often hear discussions about “closing the back door” of the church. It is simply a way of describing the number of people who leave the church for a variety of routine reasons. Churches may “close the backdoor” by better assimilation, connecting people to small groups, accentuating loving relationships, and directly helping people grow spiritually. However, leaders need to “close the side doors.” Theaters and churches have side doors that become emergency exits during a crisis. When a church experiences conflict many people will begin to look for the “side doors” through which they leave the church. A biblical process of reconciliation that is activated immediately will help close the side doors. Any conflict leaves walking wounded in the church and the leaders must bring healing to the masses quickly or risk leaving the side doors open.

We live in a culture that seems to thrive on conflict, and the church has begun to reflect the culture in this regard. How we handle conflict is a direct indicator of the health of a church or individual Christian.

SD Blessings!

Dr. Tom Cocklereece

No Comments Yet

No comments yet.

Comments RSS