Interview with Church Conflict Expert, Kenneth Newberger

Leadership Journal reported in 2004 that about four in ten pastors (38 percent) left a pastoral position due in part to conflict. On the positive side, the Christianity Today publication found that while 95 percent of pastors reported having experienced conflict – and 20 percent enduring conflict at the moment – “almost all of the pastors polled reported some positive outcomes."

Ken Newberger, Ph.D.c., Th.M., is a contributing editor for The Church Report and a member of the Association of Conflict Resolution. His weekly column, “Conflict? Ask Ken,” for Monday Morning Insight reaches church leaders across the country.

Since 2000, Dr. Newberger has worked as a conflict resolution specialist in numerous settings (church, business, family), coached hundreds, developed and implemented a conflict management system, conducted workshops, seminars, and classes, and spoke as a keynote speaker. As president of Resolve Church Conflict, he mediates church disputes.

In a recent interview with the Christian Post, Dr. Newberger explained why and how conflicts arise within the church and the way in which those conflicts can be resolved through a third-party mediator.

What made you decide to go into the ministry of mediating church conflicts?

My life took an unexpected turn when I experienced painful conflict in my second pastoral ministry in the late 90's. After more than five years in that church, conflict erupted. The denominational person responsible for my geographical area was busy with other matters so he asked a pastor in the region to help out in our situation. I, and a group of my supporters, met with this individual at the very beginning of his involvement. Weeks then went by without a word. My wife asked several times, “Why aren't we hearing anything?” I told her not to worry.

Finally, I received a brief informational call from the mediator. Shortly thereafter a “mediation report” was issued. The matter was officially over and so were my days at that church.

We were flabbergasted by a process which, among other things, never brought the disputing sides together even once! When the dust settled, I realized that there had to be a better way. The more I researched, the more I realized that the church desperately needed help in this area.

When you were forced out of pastoral ministry, what was the conflict about?

I had a problem with a member of the church who was antagonistic to my ministry. When things didn’t work out the way he wanted in a particular situation, I believe that he went to work behind the scenes and helped turned others against me.

As in other cases I with which I have become familiar, people who make charges against others rarely look at themselves as being part of the overall problem. By focusing only on the “other” individual, their own contributions to the problem are ignored.

Over the years, I have come to see this is as a repeating pattern in many congregational settings. When the issue becomes the person, everything becomes black and white. “You must leave or we will leave.” Otherwise legitimate concerns and resolvable issues become secondary.

There are, of course, situations where a parting of the ways may be the best course for the work of ministry. Such was the case between the apostle Paul and Barnabas in Acts 15:36-41. But far too often, as in my own experience, instead of finding a solution that strengthens the ministry of the church, one that causes division within the congregation, resulting in many people leaving, occurs instead.

Why do churches have conflicts?

The reason churches have conflicts is because the people who attend them are sinners. Soviet dissident and Pulitzer Prize winner, Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote, “If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.”

On this side of heaven, our sin nature doesn’t change after we become Christians.

In fact, a major reason churches experience such destructive conflict is because it is so contrary to what people (unrealistically) expect to find. When it does occur, instead of constructively dealing with it in a healthy way, people try to bury it – only to eventually discover it emerging with a vengeance. And then people are shocked. We need to establish a pro-active conflict management system in every church. Such a system will more likely transform a dispute into a positive outcome.

A few years ago, the Hartford Institute for Religion Research conducted the largest survey of congregations ever conducted in the U.S. In the area of conflict, they identified nine areas of conflict. I then did my own research and found that each of these areas of conflict can be found in the pages of the New Testament. It is reassuring to know that the interpersonal issues we have today can be traced back to the first century. God’s transcendent grace and faithfulness, thankfully, abides as well.

What do you do for churches having conflict?

Before I directly answer your question, let me provide the context. Typically, as a conflict emerges and escalates, the church becomes more and more closed as a social system. Often times, church leaders will say, “We'll handle this conflict ourselves.” This is an early indication that the conflict will not end well. What typically happens is that communication and relationships break down even further. "Parties are not talking to each other" is a common result.

This is nothing new to conflict resolution theorists and practitioners who, for years, have recognized the inherent negative interpersonal dynamics of closed systems. Researchers have found that the usefulness of direct, head-to-head negotiations decrease as the intensity of the dispute increases. At this point, a power struggle emerges.

The need for a third-party mediator to bring perspective and constructive communicative processes cannot be emphasized enough. Unresolved conflict impacts more than just the disputing parties. The entire congregation has a stake. Beyond the final resolution, how the conflict is resolved also becomes a major factor.

The first thing I do for churches in conflict is provide all parties with an outline of the process from beginning to end. The more understandable the process, the less energy expended on wondering what's going to happen next. (If the mediator can't tell you the process he intends to follow up, and the rationale behind it, look elsewhere).

Long before I arrive at the church, I collect information, including the written, first-hand perspectives of the primary, secondary, and tertiary stakeholders, as well as relevant church documents. I then follow up with correspondence and/or telephone conversations as needed. By the time I enter the church, I typically know more about the conflict than anyone else. Onsite, I personally meet with each side (typically Friday evening) before we enter into joint meetings that usually cover all day Saturday and Sunday afternoon.

My custom is to work with one or two individuals, approved by all sides, to whom I can look to help further define reality for me in that setting. I do this even though I have a fairly comprehensive understanding about that congregation. I recognize that every church has its own distinct, characteristics and practices which I might otherwise miss without local eyes.

Each party will be given the opportunity to tell his or her "story." Differences of opinion will be aired. From seemingly irreconcilable positions, we examine the underlying interests that need to be satisfied for mutually acceptable and forward-looking agreements to be reached. Factors contributing to the problem, such as organizational structure, culture, communication patterns, and individual behavior will be addressed. Strains in interpersonal relationships will also be examined with a view toward providing a non-coercive opportunity for reconciliation.

Let me quickly add, though this may come across as being very cut-and-dried or formulaic, it is anything but. From my perspective, the work can be exhausting. On the other hand, it can also be about as rewarding an endeavor that one can engage in. I have experienced the blessings Jesus speaks of in Matthew 5:9 when he said, “blessed are the peacemakers.”

What are the biblical reasons for what you do?

Far too often, Matthew 18:15-17 is appealed to as the model to follow for all church conflict. I respectfully disagree. Matthew 18 is divinely applicable for issues relating to sin. It is inappropriately applied if used to reconcile broken relations over differences of opinion over goals, methods, priorities, resources, style, etc. To introduce a church judicial process that requires one to win and the other to lose over issues where no moral transgressions are involved is a recipe for disaster.

Though the New Testament does not provide a step-by-step process for resolving differences of opinion, it does have a pattern that reflects God's heart. In Matthew 5:9, Jesus taught, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." To be a son of God means to exhibit the characteristics of God. The question for us therefore becomes, "If we are to be like God in making peace with others, how does God make peace with us?

The answer is, through a mediator. 1 Timothy 2:5 reads, “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

The concept of mediation is inherently part of the fabric of the Old and New Testaments. In the OT, the concept of a mediator between people and God is a role played out again and again in Israel’s history through: (1) its priests, who served as indispensable mediators between God and the Israelites in worshipping God as prescribed in the Mosaic law, (2) its prophets, who stood in the place of God to reveal His word and will to the Israelites as well as the surrounding Gentile nations, and (3) its kings who, in Israel’s theocracy, were charged to serve as God’s viceroys administrating justice and righteousness according to the laws God gave to Moses. These three offices, priest, prophet, and king, all mediatorial in nature, were established by God to maintain the nation’s unique relationship with Him. This pattern, of course, continues right into the New Testament through the mediatorial work of Jesus.

To a few, the mediation model may seem to be of little consequence. From my experience, however, this represents a cataclysmic paradigm shift to the way conflict can and should be handled in the church. To err is human. To mediate is divine. And blessed is (s)he who helps churches in conflict do what they have not been able to do for themselves . . . make peace.

Ken Newberger is Jewish by birth and heritage. A year after coming to faith in Christ, he left law school for seminary. He earned his Master of Theology (Th.M.) degree from Dallas Theological Seminary in 1985. For the next 15 years, he worked with congregations primarily as a senior pastor and secondarily as a church consultant as President of Christianity and Modern Thought.

Beginning in 2000, Dr. Newberger became involved in church conflict resolution. In addition to receiving four training certifications in the field and over three years of doctoral level coursework and study, he is currently a candidate for his Ph.D. in Conflict Analysis and Resolution at Nova Southeastern University (one of only two accredited doctoral programs of its kind in the U.S.). For more information about Dr. Newberger and his work, view his website at www.ResolveChurchConflict.com.