Conflicts, splits/exits in church-C2

a) The creation of church-C2

Pastor-C decided to resign from the church he was pastoring and moved back to his town. He established Church-C2 to meet the need there for a Baptist ministry. The church rented a facility and was successful in attracting many young people and families and quickly grew to 60 members. It became a member of the ABC. Later, the ABC decided to halt the membership of church-C in the ABC as the church basically ceased to exist. Prior to his death, the pastor of church-C was asked by the ABC to allow church-C2 to use the church building, but all requests were in vain.

Table 4.3 Members of church-C2

First- generation born in 1930s-1940s Second- generation born in 1950s-1960s Third-generation born in 1970s-1980s Missionaries Pastor 1 Deacons Church committee: 4 4 Church members: 50-60 10% 20% 70%

b) The conflict in church-C2

Church-C2 with many young educated members began an evangelistic ministry to reach the Arab world. The ministry became successful and was run as a church ministry, led by Pastor-C, and managed by Bishara, a young church leader.

The success of the evangelistic ministry was phenomenal, nonetheless, a few years later, a dispute erupted between Pastor-C and Bishara concerning the management of the evangelistic ministry and who was in charge. Pastor-C explained, ‘This ministry became the vision of our church, I started to work hard on issues of fundraising for this project and I involved young members in it. It became the “baby” of the church and

here was the mistake!’28

However, Bishara claimed that he started this project as a church ministry, and when Pastor-C became involved the project became successful. Bishara added, ‘When we did strategic planning Pastor-C wanted to become the manager of this project.’29

Pastor-C told me that his suggestion was to have two managers, one to manage the ministry and one for fundraising.

Interviewees claimed this was the source of conflict in church-C2. The church was divided into two parties: (1) Pastor-C, his extended family, friends and new church members, (2) Bishara, his family and some church leaders. This conflict grew and people spoke unsympathetically about each other. A third-party intervention failed to resolve the dispute. Pastor-C decided to leave the evangelistic ministry to Bishara as an independent project unrelated to church-C2.30 Although this project left the church, its problems remained and conflict between the pastor and Bishara escalated.31 Consequently, Pastor-C became angry and Bishara was asked to leave the church.32

Six years before the conflict, a charismatic Arab Canadian pastor (hence, the Canadian Pastor) became a close friend of Pastor-C and church-C2. He visited church- C2 several times, influencing it with charismatic teaching. During the conflict he mentored members and tried to help Pastor-C. Based on the interviews it seems his ideology influenced the way church members handled this conflict, as I will explain in the next chapters.

c) A few church leaders exited from church-C2

During the conflict at church-C2 three church leaders left. One leader, Albert, admitted, ‘I could not submit spiritually to Pastor-C any more. My wife and I prayed

28 _{Pastor-C, Jul 2015.} 29 _{Bishara, Aug 2015.} 30

Third-party report, Dec 2009; Bishara, Aug 2015. 31 _{Bishara, Albert, and Shirin, Aug 2015.}

106

and we felt we should leave; if I couldn’t submit spiritually to my pastor then I would risk myself and the church.’33

A year later, Pastor-C decided to resign from church-C2. He appointed a leader from a different church to pastor alongside him for six months before he would leave to pastor church-D.34 This action caused more disagreements in the church, resulting in a serious dispute during one Sunday meeting, where members confronted and argued with Pastor-C. Shortly after this Pastor-C decided to leave church-C2.35

d) Pastor-C left church-C2 and the ABC intervened

Pastor-C asked the ABC to take over the ministry in church-C2. The ABC met with Pastor-C and the leaders exited from church-C2. The ABC recommended that they return and support Pastor-C.36 Pastor-C insisted on leaving and the Ministry Committee of the ABC (hence, the ABC-Committee) became responsible for pastoring the church in the transition period. It tried to bring about reconciliation between Pastor-C and Bishara. The ABC-Committee met with them and they apologized to one another. Bishara, on the request of the ABC-Committee, apologized in front of the church. Pastor-C, who was not present in that meeting, became angry at not being included in this process as he was the pastor and felt he was the one who was wronged.37

Pastor-C agreed to focus on pastoring church-D, but refused to drop his membership in church-C2 for his family’s sake.38 The ABC insisted Pastor-C drop his membership and requested that his family stay at church-C2. When Pastor-C left church his family and friends, who were not happy that he was leaving, left with him. The ABC

33 _{Albert, Aug 2015.}

34 _{Where he has been pastoring for the last several years.} 35 _{Pastor-C, Jul 2015; Albert, Shirin, Aug 2015.}

36

Letter from the ABC-Committee 18 Jun 2013. 37 _{Letter 18 Dec 2013.}

38 _{In the beginning the ABC-Committee agreed that he kept his membership but then changed its attitude} (Pastor-C, July 2015; letter 27 Dec 2013).

worked to bring back the people who left church-C2 and Bishara returned after being absent for over three years.39

e) Pastor-C established church-C3

Pastor-C decided to begin a ‘home group’ for people who left with him, and later established church-C3. When the ABC informed Pastor-C that this was unacceptable, he decided to resign from the ABC. At the same time, the ABC appointed Boulus, a young man with a Bachelor of Divinity, as the interim pastor; he pastored church-C2 until the reintegration took place.40

f) Reconciliation

One year later Pastor-C started some efforts to reconcile and reintegrate with church-C2. He contacted the ABC-Committee which was positive to lead the reintegration.

The findings reveal two important stages in the reconciliation process. First, the reconciliation-retreat conference (titled: ‘I am about to do a new thing’). Pastor-C, with church-C3, visited a retreat church-C2 was holding; Pastor-C went to the pulpit and tearfully apologized to church-C2. Worship continued for hours and different groups joined to pray together for healing and forgiveness. All interviewees told me that during that meeting an unexpected and very powerful reconciliation took place. This was followed by the reintegration of the two churches a few months later. Second, the Canadian Pastor’s conference (titled: ‘The complete love’) which took place a year after the reintegration. Some interviewees said during the conference another barrier to real reconciliation fell down.41

39

ABC records, Pastor-C, Bishara, 12, Aug 2015.

40 _{ABC-Committee report; Boulus, Aug 2015; David and George, Aug 2015.} 41 _{The two stages will be discussed in Chapter Seven.}

108

Boulus, the interim pastor, was appointed to pastor another church. He left church-C2 and Pastor-C returned to church-C2 as a member but refused to become the official pastor. He functioned as the acting pastor of church-C2, and his presence in the church made it difficult for the ABC and church-C2 to bring a new pastor.42 Later, Pastor-C insisted on pastoring church-C2 for two years, during which he would train a leader from the church to pastor the church after him.43

The three case-studies presented the phenomenon where pastors, in a Congregationalist polity, were the main authority with power to dismiss church deacons /church committee or leaders from office. What was the source of their powerful authority? Why did pastors cling to power and destroy any form of competition to their position? Why were deacons/leaders unable to use their authority as church leaders to replace the pastor or take part in leadership? Why did dissatisfied members compromise and leave church? To answer these questions, it is necessary to understand the nature and causes of conflict in Palestinian Baptist churches in Israel.

After presenting the background of churches A, B and C in the three cases, for case-A I will focus on the main split that led to the creation of church-A2. For case-B, I will focus on the split that led to the creation of church-B2 and for case-C, I will focus on the split that led to the creation of church-C3.

The three cases have many common characteristics: a similar context, all are in the same country, members are Palestinian Baptists converted from traditional churches, the churches were planted by the same mission, and they are members of the ABC. Nonetheless, they differ in: location, age of conflict,44 generation of pastors/members,45 and material capital.46 It is evident that the theological and socio-cultural factors are the

42 _{Shirin, Albert, and Boulus, Aug 2015.} 43

ABC-Committee report, 8 Oct 2016. 44 _{Old and contemporary.}

45 _{First, second, third generation Baptist.} 46 _{Church building, school.}

primary factors contributing to the conflicts in the three cases. Secondary factors are church building, women’s informal power and economic issues.