72 | P a g e

Journal of Religion 1(4) September, 2019

Social structure of PEFA and its influence on unity

1Matisi, Margaret Nanjala

2Wepukhulu Rispah - Namasaka

3Mutsotso Stanley Ngome

Abstract: The study was set to establish the social structure of Pentecostal Evangelistic Fellowship of Africa (PEFA)

and its influence on unity. The study used a mixed method approach for designing sampling techniques, where

purposive and simple random techniques were used to arrive at a sample of 164 respondents. Further, questionnaires,

focus group discussions (FGDs) and in-depth interviews were used as data collection tools. Quantitative data generated

from questionnaires were analyzed using descriptive statistics and presented in form of tables and figures after

serializing, developing code books, exporting to excel sheet then to SPSS sheet version 25.0 and interpreted whereas

qualitative data was analyzed thematically after transcription of recorded voices. Quantitative was complimented by

qualitative data in the analysis. The findings revealed that the social structure is rigid and more centralized, therefore should be implemented in decentralized way; trained pastors and leaders were proved to perform better than non-

trained in terms of handling of issues daily, demonstrating spiritual maturity during conflicts, confidence in

addressing emerging issues on time regardless of one’s socio-economic status and position in church. Thestudy

concluded that the social structure serves the purpose of uniformity in executing programs, however, growth and

development is dependent on how every church develops its own leadership, programming, theological and membership

commitment. It was therefore recommended that in PEFA church, there was need to review decentralized

implementation of the social structure, theological training curricula, sensitize leaders on reviewed constitution and

strike a balance between meeting spiritual, social, emotional and physical needs of their members since churches which

had welfare and income generating activities experienced less conflicts.

Key Words: Social Structure, Unity ,conflict.

I. INTRODUCTION

Kreutz (2010) observes that in Europe church conflict was common in the era of church fathers as they were

faced mainly with the challenge of doctrinal differences.

This brought in polarization that pitched the West against

the Eastern Church. There was acrimony between the

church in the East and that of the West. Similarly in

America, Peters (2010), laments that being a Christian

pastor today is more difficult than in any time in

memory. According to him, the 21ST Century has

witnessed the collapse of Christian consensus that held

the American culture for centuries. Far too many good

pastors are being driven out of ministries, leaving thousands of churches weak and vulnerable to spiritual

attack. Without leadership, denominational factions

multiply, evangelism declines, divorces proceed

unrestrained, discipleship loses direction and

missionaries are forgotten. A pastor is most often forced

out of ministry due to lack of success at resolving

differences with other people within the church. For

instance, the finding of the research that was conducted by the Christianity Today International revealed that

each year thousands of pastors leave their churches

leading to an estimated cost of $684 million a year Sande

(2004). The researcher learnt that most congregations

have not been properly equipped to deal with conflict,

so when a pastor is unequally prepared in conflict

management enters into such a church, the stage is set

for agonizing conflict and disunity.

Pentecostalism is a Christian religious movement that

started in the early 20th C in the United States of

America (USA). The movement emphasizes on the direct

Available online at: www.targetjournals.com

73 | P a g e

personal experiences with God through the saving grace

of the Lord Jesus Christ and glossolalia (speaking in

tongues). This movement traces its origin from the

account of the Day of Pentecost over 2000 years as

exemplified in Acts 2:1-4. It is recorded that on the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit came upon believers who

were praying in the upper room in Jerusalem enabling

them speak in diverse tongues. Pentecostalism emerged

among radical adherents of the holiness movement who

were energized by revivalism and expectation of the

imminent return of Jesus Christ. However, a unique

feature notable from the beginning is that Pentecostal

churches were involved in unity and conflicts (Gathuki,

2015).

II. METHODOLOGY

The study adopted descriptive survey research design.

Descriptive research design describes the present status

of people, attitudes and progress (Oranga, 2016). This

allows the study to examine the relationship between

variables. The study examined the social structure of PEFA and its influence on unity. The study was carried

out in selected PEFA Churches in Bungoma County of

the Western region of Kenya. Bungoma is located within

longitudes 0.8479oN and latitude 34.7020oE. It has a

population of 1,375,063 and an area of 2,069 km²

according to 2009 census (Ministry of Planning

Bungoma, 2017). The target population of the study was

300 PEFA churches and respondents included; the

bishops, pastors, deacons/elders, youth leaders, women

leaders and Sunday school teachers of PEFA Churches in

Bungoma County. Purposive sampling was used to select

bishops from fourteen (14) PEFA districts, 30% pastors. 10% elders, 10% youth leaders, 10% women leaders and

10% Sunday school teachers.A total of 164 formed a

sample as size as summarized in the table below.

Table 1 showing distribution of sample size

Category

of

responde

nts

Target

populati

on(N)

Percen

tage

(%)

Sample

populati

on(n)

Samp

ling

techni

que

Bishops 14 100% 14 Purposive

District

Pastors

300 30% 90 Simpl

e

rando

m

Elders/De

acons

300 10% 30 Simpl

e

rando

m

Youth

leaders

100 10% 10 Simpl

e

rando

m

Women

leaders

100 10% 10 Simpl

e

rando

m

Sunday

schools

teachers

100 10% 10 Simpl

e

random

Total

Sample

Size

1014 164

Source: (County general assembly)

A stud pilot was carried out to establish the validity

and reliability of the research instruments. This was

carried out in Trans-Nzoia a neighboring county to

the area of the study.

Data was analyzed using both inferential and

descriptive. SPSS was used on quantitative data and thematic analysis on qualitative data. Ethical

consideration was adhered to through subjecting the

study to anti- plagiarism and seeking permission to

carry out research from National Commission for

Science Technology and innovation (NACOSTI).

Consent was also sought from all respondents

sampled for the study.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 The Social Structure of PEFA Church and its

influence on unity The Structural Functionalism theory of Herbert

Spencer and Robert Merton, (1957) that was adopted

for this study asserts that human society as a whole in

terms of the function of its constituent elements such

as norms, customs, traditions and institutions is an

organism that ought to be structured as a social

institution. The church being an institution requires

good administrative structures for its smooth running

just as a society. This theory is in agreement with the

efforts made by PEFA which emphasizes on unity in

diversity whose absence leads to conflicts. To address the first objective, a number of questions

were posed to the respondents. During an interview

with bishops, the researcher wished to know the

social structure of PEFA Church. A majority of the

bishops in a series of interviews described the social

structure as how social positions are organized and

distributed among different people from highest to

the lowest and these leaders should relate with one

another as brethren. Three other bishops shared

contrary views. They said that Jesus is the overall

head and all other positions are filled in accordance

to God’s plan and the established Constitution of

74 | P a g e

PEFA Church leaders such as pastors. Bishops and

overseers are viewed as shepherds and the members

as the flock. In addition, responses from the

questionnaires administered to 90 pastors were

summed up in Table 2.1. The pastors were asked to rate the extent to which they agreed with various

statements regarding the meaning of PEFA Church

social structure in relation to promoting unity and

growth. Using 1- 6 point Likert rating scale where 1

is Strongly Disagree (SD),2 Disagree(D),3 Not Sure

(NS),4 Agree(A) and 5 Strongly Agree(SA).Their

responses were computed as presented in table 1.1

below

Table 2: Responses on Social Structure of church

governance and management

Statement frequency

percentage

Strongly disagree 23

26

Disagree 12

13.3

Not sure 19

21.1

Agree 21

23.3

Strongly agree 8

8.9

No response 5

6

Source: field data According to the findings in Table 2.1, majority of

the respondents at 23(26%) and12 (13.3%) disagreed

that social structure of PEFA Church is governance

and management, whereas 12(23.3%) and 8(8.9%)

agreed. This shows that most pastors did not have a

clear understanding of the social structure of the

church. Further, this misunderstanding was evident in

19(21.1%) of the respondents who were not sure of

the structure of the church in terms of governance

and management while 5(6%) of the respondents did

not give any response.

Table 3: Responses on how authority is exercised

from top to bottom level

Statement frequency

percentage

Strongly disagree 5

6

Disagree 4

4.4

Not sure 3

3.33

Agree 30

33.3

Strongly agree 48

53.3

No response 1

1.1

Source: field data

As to how church authority was exercised from top to

bottom, a majority of the respondents with a rating of

48 (53.3%0 strongly agreed and 30(33.3%) agreed,

while5 (6%) strongly disagreed. 4(4.4%) of the

respondents disagreed, 3(3.33%) 0f the respondents

were not sure; whereas 1(1.1%) had no response.

This denotes that the pastors’ understanding of social

structure as hierarchy of leadership was in agreement

with a majority of the bishops.

Table 4: Responses on how social structure

promotes uniformity in all churches

Statement frequency

percentage

Strongly disagree 34

38

Disagree 16

18

Not sure 20

22.2

Agree 13

14.4

Strongly agree 7

8

No response 0

0

Source: field data

Analysis of Table 4 Responses on how social

structure promotes uniformity in all churches

The findings in Table 4 are as shown. The results

displayed in Table 2.3 show that majority 34(38%) of

the respondents strongly disagreed with the fact that

social structure promotes uniformity in all churches,

16(18%) of them disagreed. 20(22.2%) of the

respondents were not sure; 13(14.4%) agreed, 7(8%)

strongly agreed, while 0(0%) of the respondents had no response.

The 34(38%) and 16(18%) respondents who strongly

disagreed and disagreed respectively are in

agreement with Gathuki, (2015) who asserted that

those disagreements lead to separation of leaders in

the church which culminates to divisions and

splinter groups based on differences in church

policies. Chacha (2007) concurs with Gathki by

stating that conflicts in churches are accelerated by

refusal of the clergy to hand over power after

75 | P a g e

elections.This finally results into two or more

different camps each with a leader and a claim for

legitimate leadership. The study therefore,

established that majority of pastors in church do not

agree with the fact that the social structure promotes uniformity in all churches.

Table 5: Responses on how social structure helps

uphold values and principles of peaceful co-

existence

Statement frequency

percentage

Strongly disagree 19

21.1

Disagree 30

33.3

Not sure 14

16

Agree 9

10

Strongly agree 10

11.1

No response 8

8.9

Source: field data

Analysis of Table 5: Responses on how social

structure helps uphold values and principles of

peaceful co-existence.

The findings in table 5 revealed that majority of the

respondents at 30(33.3%) indicated that pastors disagreed, while 19(21.1%) strongly disagreed that

social structure helped to uphold values and

principles of peaceful co-existence; 10(11.1%) of the

respondents strongly agreed, while 8(8.1) of the

respondents had no response. This study established

that social structure as an aspect of promoting

uniformity, upholding values and peaceful co-

existence were not considered significant to the

meaning of social structure by over fifty percent of

pastors. The divergent views show how pastors and

church leaders perceive and implement the social structure in their own way. This concurs with PEFA

structure as displayed in its constitution, (2018)

which states that each District and / or region shall

fall within their geographical jurisdiction and the

PEFA church shall be responsible for matters of

common concern into the National Church and those

affecting relationship between Districts and Regions.

Table 6: Responses on how social structure

promotes faith and obedience in church

Statement frequency

percentage

Strongly disagree 23

26

Disagree 13

14.4

Not sure 20

22.2

Agree 30

33

Strongly agree 4

4.4

No response 0

0

Source: field data

The results in Table 6 revealed that majority of

respondents 30(33.3%) agreed and 4(4.4%) strongly

agreed that the social structure promoted faith and

obedience in the church, followed by 23(26%) of

respondents who strongly disagreed that social structures promoted faith and obedience in the

church; 13(14.4%) equally disagreed, while

20(22.2%) of them were not sure.

The findings established that majority of pastors

confirmed that the social structure promote faith and

obedience in the church. This is in line with the

deliberations and functions of the Council of Elder’s

arm of the PEFA structure which comprises of (9)

gifted respected and who are looked to for wisdom

for embodying and articulating with passion the

values, vision, mission and faith that PEFA church holds dear ( PEFA Constitution, 2018).

Table 7: Responses on how social structure

enhances social responsibility among church

members

Statement frequency

percentage

Strongly disagree 28

31

Disagree 8

8.9

Not sure 10

11

Agree 14

15.6

Strongly agree 25

28

No response 5

6

Source: field data

The findings shown in Table 7 indicate that majority

of the respondents at 25(28%) and 14(15.6%) agreed

with the statement which translates to 39(53.6%),

28(31%) and 8(8.9% of the respondents disagreed

with the fact that the social structure enhanced social

76 | P a g e

responsibility among members, while 5(6%) had no

response. The findings established that over fifty

percent of the pastors agreed that the social structure

enhances social responsibility among members, while

about forty percent disagreed with the statement. Majority of pastors who agreed were reinforced by

most pastors who observed that the social structure of

PEFA enhanced social responsibility among

members. This was complemented by church elders

and women leaders in more than twenty churches

who were interviewed, asserted that the social

structure of the church administered church matters

in areas such as leadership, spiritual guidance,

doctrine, roles and responsibilities of different church

organs.

An interview with a deacon at Kimilili, on 21st April

2018, revealed that the social structure is highly

centralized with minimal autonomy. Decisions

regarding financial management, theological and

doctrinal structure are a preserve of the top

leadership. Therefore, more often than not, these are

root causes of conflicts. For instance, one Bishop

directed church elders to remit 90% of the church

income to the district and render their title deed to his

custody arguing that the church had many working class members hence, had more finances. This

directive was rejected by the council of elders of the

said church leading to great animosity between the

church in question and the Bishop. He concluded that

in as much as important decisions are a preserve of

top leadership at the district level, some of them are

influenced by greed and are responsible for disunity

in many Churches.

Another question was posed to the bishops to identify

and give examples of the existing social structure of

PEFA church. Majority of bishops cited that the correct social structure of PEFA Church was drawn

from the new PEFA Constitution (2018), as

represented in diagram 1.

77 | P a g e

Diagram 1: Showing the organizational structure of PEFA in Kenya

Source: PEFA Church Constitution,( 2018)

Pentecostal Evangelistic Fellowship of Africa (PEFA) Church has a hierarchical structure as

follows: General Assembly is the supreme authority

whose mandate and functions include, worship,

fellowship, election of national officials, adopting

policies, enacting legislation, receiving training and

conducting other activities in support of the

mission/vision of the PEFA Church with a view to

fulfilling the great commission. National executive

council-the second top most organ which represents

all members, it ensures equal representation and each

ones voice is heard. It has authority to plan by setting

direction, purpose, future strategies, setting goals, defining ethics and values, steering relationships,

collaboration and alliances with the public and

members. The national executive board, it executes

the following functions; ensuring compliance of all

approved church programs, doctrines, constitution,

policies and by-laws, ensure ministers adhere to

standards of conduct by disciplining and giving

penalties to those who negate the guidelines, promote

the strategic direction of the church, coordinate and

manage church national programs including fund

raising efforts, public relations, ecclesiastical

General Assembl

yNational executive council

National executive

BoardRegional

Assembly/Board

Council of Elders

Boards, Committees &Teams of the Church

County General Assembly

County Executive Council

County Executive Board

District Assemblies

District Councils

District Executive Boards

Local Church Assembly

Local Church Board

Departments& Ministries

78 | P a g e

relations and related activities. In addition, it ensures

church resources are utilized effectively and

efficiently in accordance to church laws, policy and

ethical practice as well as ensure all church organs

maintain the highest integrity. Council of Elders is body that acts as a symbol of unity in diversity for

organizing prayers over church unity with

consideration of feedback from the members and

church leadership, provide support to presiding

Bishop, ordain ministers, dedicate PEFA Cathedrals

and grant charters.

Boards, committees and teams of the Church act as

standing group with specific decision making

authority. Committees performs administrative role

while teams of the church make decisions and

implement them as they remain answerable to their appointing power. Regional Assembly is part of the

social structure higher than County general assembly

because it has similar functions of the National

General Assembly. It is responsible for worship,

fellowship, election of national officials, adopting

policies, enacting legislation, receiving, training, and

conducting other activities in support of the

mission/vision of the PEFA Church with a view to

fulfilling the great commission. It is also the

legislative organ of the region with powers to make

and amend the regional by-laws, receives, hears and determines appeals of decisions made by the

District/county and regional councils. It is the overall

policy making organ. The regional assembly has the

regional councils and boards that play supervisory

role, establish vision, mission and policy for the

region besides vetting and approving candidates’

ministerial service in PEFA churches. The District

Assemblies constitute another important level of the

governance which serves as the principal legislative

organ at the district/county level. It receives, hears

and determines appeals arising from the District

council and district executive board. District council implements decisions of district assembly, conveys

decisions of regional assembly to all local churches,

boards and committees within their jurisdiction. It

also supervises, enforces required standards and

makes decisions on establishment of new churches,

recruitment of new ministers/pastors, transfers of

ministers and considers reports from local churches.

District executive board; works with District

assembly/council. It is responsible for formation and

promotion of local church programs, support mission and vision of the local churches in tandem with the

PEFA constitution. Local church assembly works in

conjunction with district councils and district

executive board. It reaches out to the community

through service and witnessing, nurturing other

church members through Christian fellowship and

biblical teaching.

With the structure of PEFA church in place as shown

in the diagram above it is hoped that conflicts can be minimized hence enhance unity (harmony). However,

in an interview with one of the PEFA overseers in

Webuye West District, the researcher was informed

that PEFA structure is quite rigid. The top

management is adamant on policies which makes it

difficult for local church pastors to make independent

decisions especially on matters of finance. This has

been the major cause of conflicts between the higher

office and the lower carder of leadership. Sometimes

decisions are taken by the national executive council

which must be adhered to by the junior officers

unquestionably. This has eventually led to serious conflicts resulting into divisions and break away of

pastors to form splinter groups. This has further

contributed to decimal growth and development of

PEFA churches. This scenario fosters disunity in the

churches hence the justification of the current study.

The study sought to find out social structure and who

is responsible for key decision making; the following

responses were elicited from 90 pastors as tabulated

in Table 2.2

Table 8: Shows Views of pastors on how PEFA

Church Structure works

Natio

nal

leader

ship

Regio

nal

leader

ship

Count

y/

Distri

ct

leader

ship

Local

churc

h

leade

rship

N

=

90

% N

=

90

% N

=

90

% N

=

90

%

Support of

local churches

vision and mission

44 4

9

29 3

2.

2

12 1

3.

3

5 0

.

6

Recruitment,p

romotion,dism

issal and

transfers of

pastors

21 2

3.

3

24 2

6.

7

42 4

6.

7

1 0

.

1

Governance

and decision

making on

leadership,

finances,

doctrine and policy

14 1

5.

6

37 4

1.

1

34 3

7.

8

5

0

.

6

Legislative 5 5. 35 3 46 5 4 4

79 | P a g e

and judicial

decision

making

6 9 1.

1

.

4

Based on results shown in Table 2.2, majority of the

respondents at 44 (49%), indicated that support for

local church’s vision and mission is determined by national leadership followed by regional at ,22 (32.2

%), district/county leadership 12 (13.3%) and least

rated was local church leadership at 5(0.6%) .

County/district leadership was ranked highly by

42(46.7%) in determining recruitment, promotion,

dismissal and transfer of pastors whereas national

leadership were almost at par with 23.3% and 26.7%

respectively. Local leadership remained least rated by

less than 1% of the respondents. On governance ,

decision making on leadership, finances, church

doctrine and policy 37 (41.1%) and 34 (37.8%)

respondents said it was the work of regional and district/county leadership, with 15.6% percent

indicating that national leadership played a key role.

Concerning legislative and judicial decision making,

43(39%) respondents said it was the role of regional

leaders while majority of respondents at 46(51.1%)

asserted that it remained the role of district

leadership. This implies that top to bottom leadership

remains a determinant feature for the national and

regional leadership of PEFA church and the local

leadership deals with lower level decisions. However,

the researcher disagrees with 46(51.1%) who alleged that legislative and judicial decision making is the

role of district leadership yet the PEFA constitution

(2018) article 8 sub-section 2.4.1 states that the

National Assembly is the principle legislative organ

and the highest ranking organ of PEFA church with

authority to receive, hear and determine appeals

arising out of the decisions of the National Executive

Council or other bodies. Hence, it can be deduced

from the result that such disparity in understanding

the structure of PEFA is the cause of conflict in this

church. From interview with bishops, majority of them

displayed express understanding of levels of

authority and mandate of social structure which is

enshrined in the PEFA constitution (2018).

From the FGDs in Webuye Kimilili and Tongaren

districts youth leaders and Sunday school teachers

acknowledged that governance and key decision

making is a preserve of top leadership. They also

noted that the constitution of PEFA provides a rigid

social structure especially on discipline and financial

matters as shown below:

Disciplinary issues are a

challenge to young pastors

because of provisions in the

church constitution .The

elderly members cannot be

reprimanded by their young

pastors or point a finger at

them. Besides, our culture

disallows discipline of an adult

by a young person. As a result,

misconduct continues among

the elderly men and women

and replicates to the youths. In

finance the local church pastor

depends on 60% of the total

offering collected per month

for salary thus, pastors remain

helpless if top leadership is

indecisive on such matters.

More so, this discourages most

pastors who break away to

form other ministries that are

autonomous (Bungoma,

Lugulu,

Tongaren/PEFA/Women

Leaders/001).

From the above observations it implies that there is a

gap between the top leadership and the local church

which brews conflicts in PEFA. This concurs with

Clark (2006) who states that Material issues are the

major areas over which churches and their members can become divided. Anytime a church must cut its

budget, salary or staff are let go, conflict is bound to

follow. Here the blame game takes place as to who

must take responsibility for the lack of finances.

Churches are not like other institutions where

budgeting and funding take place. Every department

and departmental head desires that he or she gets

their fair share of the funding pie. Often intense

struggles occur when one group in the church feels

they are getting the shorter end financially. Church

members are very sensitive as to how money is

properly spent as well as improperly spent. The study sought to find out whether the social

structure affects unity positively or negatively in

PEFA church. Majority of Bishops indicated that the

social structure promotes Christian values, uniformity

in socio-religious practices, faith and maturity among

Christians. Two bishops with divergent views noted

that social structure of the church should not be over

emphasized at the expense of true worship and

genuine unity. They argued that social structure has

contributed to the gap between Church leaders and

their members. Whenever one group of the leaders supports a pastor with some members, a rival faction

supports the other section of leaders because of

economic status. This gap is the cause of conflict in

this church. A similar question was posed to an FGD

held on 28/2/2018 as shown below:

80 | P a g e

This structure is not clear to us,

its main role is to promote

status quo. We need relevant

gospel message that will

address socio-economic needs like poverty, unemployment,

disease and how to combat

moral threats. We the youth

feel that a lot is at stake of the

rigid social structure, some

leaders are unapproachable

and indifferent to new ideas

which makes it difficult for

growth and leads to low

retention of the youth in the

church. Some bishops have

security detail and personal assistants who block most

young people from accessing

them when need arises. (WGC

/Youth/voice 002)

(Bgm/Youth/FDGs recorded

voice 005).

These findings reveal that the social structure alone is

not a basis for sustaining church unity. The

murmuring and complaints from members can widen

the gap between youths and the older generation in

the church hence counterproductive on unity and church growth.However, Adeyemo (2006) disagrees

by arguing that believers in Pentecostal churches are

supposed to maintain love and unity within their

circles. He equally declares that unity of purpose

within the church as the body of Christ is paramount.

These responses enabled the researcher to ask another

question where respondents were to give their

opinion on whether the Church service structure has

influence on church unity. The response was yes,

because many Pentecostal churches globally operate

on constitution and pragmatic structure which

promotes and supports churches from grass root level (O.I Bishop of Kimilili PEFA 26/01/2019). A

majority of respondents who included women

leaders, Church elders and Sunday school teachers

strongly agreed that the nature of programs such as

praise and worship are very appealing mainly to the

youth. A few noted that the whole church activities

are designed in such a way that each individual feels

contented in what they engage in. This may not

necessarily influence retention and new membership

but fosters unity of purpose. Others of contrary

opinion stated that unity is determined by a number of factors, for instance, quality of music equipment

which influenced quality of praise and worship and

liveliness of the sermon. Failure for any church to

have modernized music instruments affects the

numerical growth of the church by not attracting or

retaining young people.

Based on these arguments concerning quality of

service influencing unity, it can be inferred that quality sermon and the presence of lively praise and

worship accompanied by modernized music

instruments enhanced church unity.

On the contrary, bishops said that the service

structure was not the main ingredient for unity but

systematic pulpit ministry should be attractive and

relevant to congregation hence have long lasting

impact on the members.

Further, the study enquired about the contribution of

policy to Church unity. The pastors were expected to

respond by stating the extent to which they agree or

disagree with statements provided using a Likert rating scale of 5. Their responses were tabulated in

frequencies and percentages as presented in Table

2.3.

Table 9: Pastors’ responses on church policy

Stateme

nt

N=9

0

SA A NS D SD

Church

policy

applies to

all

regardles

s of the position

and

socio-

economic

status

F 36 5 10 19 20

% 40 5.5 11.

1

21.

1

22.

2

Church

policy is

enforced by

leaders

and

pastors

only

F 27 30 8 6 11

% 30 33.3

8.8 6.6 12.2

Different

policy

document

s of

church

policies

are accessibl

e to

leaders

F 15 19 33 21 3

% 16.

7

21.

1

36.

7

23.

3

3.3

3

81 | P a g e

and

members

Scale: f= frequency, N= total number

(Source: primary data).

From table 2.3 the findings indicated that 36 (40%)

respondents strongly agreed, 5 (5.5%) agreed, 10

(11.1%) were not sure, 19 (21%) disagreed and 20

(22.2%) of those who said church policy applies to

all regardless of the position and economic status

strongly disagreed. Another issue was on whether

church policy is enforced by leaders and pastors only;

27 (30%) strongly agreed, 30 (33.3%) agreed, (8.8%)

were not sure, 6 (6.6%) disagreed and 11 (12.2%)

strongly disagreed. Concerning accessibility to

different church policy documents the responses were

as follows 15 (16.7%) strongly agreed, 19 (21.1%) agreed, 33 (36.7%) were not sure, 21 (23.3%)

disagreed and 3 (3.33%) strongly disagreed.

From the foregoing findings majority of respondents

36(40%) agreed that church policy applied to all

regardless of position and economic status. In this

study policy issues include finance qualification for

leadership or membership, expulsion of errant

members and celebration of the Holy Communion.

The (40%) concurred with Awojobi(2011), who

observed that the love of money could cause tension and conflict. The selfish ambitions to be rich by all

means on the part of leadership and also to gather

riches sometimes encourage double standards in

dealings. The manipulations that usually follow such

actions on the part of leadership always end in crisis

and conflict. Contrary to Awojobi, Chacha (2007)

asserted that problems emerge in the church due to

leaders who assume positions of leadership which

they neither qualify for nor have been called to

undertake. He further states that conflicts in the

church are accelerated by refusal of the clergy to hand over power after elections which eventually

culminates into divisions with each faction claiming

legitimate leadership. However, those who disagreed

with the fact that church policy applies to all, may

have alluded their reason to the fact that PEFA

structure is rigid as expressed earlier in the study by

an FGD held on 28/2/2018 who said that the structure

was not clear to them since its role was to promote

the church’s status quo. These respondents agreed in

principle with (Sanders and Kamau, 1994), who

observed that failure to adhere to set policies by

church leadership leads to expulsion of some members from the church.

On the question as to whether church policy was

enforced by leaders and pastors only, the findings

revealed that majority 27(30%) and 30(33.3%) were

in agreement. This implies that PEFA Church

structure entrusts the duties of enforcing church

policy to top management while ignoring other

departments, hence escalation of tension and conflict. Nevertheless, the 6(12.2%) and 11(12.2) who

disagreed with the fact that church policy was

enforced by leaders and pastors only, concurred with

Ngasura (2012) who argued that all church members

are supposed to be involved in church issues and

meeting important concerns. For this reason

individual local churches were established with a

need to carry on the work of Christ as a local body of

believers. According to the researcher, effective

leadership understands the players, brings them

together and getting them work together as a team to

reach their potential. It is also the responsibility of those in top management to create an enabling

environment where each member of the church

participates in leadership rather than playing games

of exclusion. This only results into misunderstanding,

confusion and disputes which in turn undermines

church unity. Concerning accessibility to different

church policy documents, the findings revealed

indicated that 33(36.7%) of the sampled pastors were

not sure while 21(23.3%) disagreed. This could mean

that most pastors of PEFA church are either semi-

literate or ignorant of the fact that they ought to access policy documents especially the constitution

and read in order to acquaint themselves with church

policies. Such anomalies could be responsible for

rampant conflicts, counter divisions and splits in

PEFA church, hence the justification of the current

study.

The researcher also sought to establish if the

respondents were in agreement as to whether the

social structure promotes or undermines the unity of

the church and in turn limit growth and development

in PEFA Church. Most respondents who included Bishops, Pastors, Church elders and women leaders

agreed that the social structure enhances harmony

and uniformity in executing programs among all

PEFA churches, but it is not a yardstick for

sustaining unity in individual churches. Unity must

be cultivated through pastors and leaders by focusing

on the great commission and calling. On the contrary,

youth and Sunday school leaders maintained that

social structure reinforces status quo and rigidity

which discourages many youth from consistency in

membership and spiritual growth. Some said their pastors had come up with programs which help the

youth to explore their gifts and talents in technology

to the benefit of church.

IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

82 | P a g e

It was concluded that Pentecostal Evangelistic

Fellowship of Africa church has put in place ways of

identifying conflicts such as formation of disciplinary

committee, subcommittees and procedures to handle

conflict from the National to the district level also known as PEFA Cathedrals as indicated in the

reviewed constitution of 2018.

The study recommended that;

i. Pentecostal Evangelistic Fellowship of

Africa church needs to relook at the social

structure to minimize conflict.

ii. The governance of PEFA church should

encourage bottom -up decision making

mechanisms.

iii. There should be training of church leaders

for easy streamlining of policy and church functions.

REFERENCES

Adeyemo, T. (Ed.).(2006). Leadership in Africa

Bible Commentary p.546. Kenya: Zondervan

Corporation

Alexander, D. (1999). Zondervan handbook to the

bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing

House.

Anderson, A. H. and Walter, J. H. (Eds) (1999).

Pentecostals After a Century: Global Perspectives on

a Movement in a Transition. London: Sheffield

Academic Press.

Chou, H. G. (2008). The impact of congregational characteristics on conflict-related exit.

Gifford, P. (1998). African Christianity: Its Public

Role in Uganda and Other African Countries.

Kampala: Fountain Publishers.

Leas, S., &Kittlaus, P. (1971). Church fights

managing conflict in the local church. Philadelphia,

PA: Westminster Press.

Odhiambo, E.O.S. (2013). Leadership Styles and

Conflicts Management in Anglican Church of Kenya

Diocese of Maseno North. Not published.

Rubin, A., &Babbie, E. R. (2010).Essential research

methods for social work. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

Wanyonyi, D.N.S. (2013). Intra-ethnic Conflict and

Development of Local Markets in the Larger Mt.

Elgon District.Unpublished.Kothari C.R, (2011).

Research methodology: Methods and Techniques,

second Edition New Age International Ltd.

Publishers. New Delhi

Mugenda,O.&Mugenda, A.G.(2003).Research

Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches.

Acts Press, Nairobi.