Jesus thought that disciples should take the initiative to pursue reconciliation.
This might look like powerful dominant people define the relationship.
“If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you so that BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED” (Matt. 18:15-18).
Jesus also thought we should follow His example in selfless service.
This might look like God is looking for humble, dominated people.
But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Matt. 20:25-28).
So how does this work?
Reconciliation
The highest law for Christians is that we love God and people. We seek true reconciliation with everyone. But reconciliation often feels beyond reach, so we settle for dominating, being dominated, or distance. This might be true in marriages, family and church relationships, and friendships. The closer the relationship is, the more painful it is when it goes wrong.
Powerful Ideas
“What would it take to make things as right as possible?”
1) Don’t settle until you have done all you can.
a) It is easy, and may feel safe to get offended and tell a third party who wasn’t there. Gossip.
b) It may feel courageous to go over and tell the person how they got offended. The other gets defensive, and the conversation is unhelpful.
c) One of the parties may absorb the offense and, over time, develop other severe health or relational symptoms.
d) It may feel holy for one of the parties to say sorry when they don’t mean it or to demand an apology from the other. This power-over solution initiated by the power-over person will likely not last.
e) Or it may feel holy to “submit” to a higher authority, hoping that they will be on your side and rescue you. I have seen this often, but I haven’t seen it work well.
2) True reconciliation includes both parties feeling heard and agreeing on what it will take to make things right. True reconciliation often takes tremendous courage because everyone will have to confront weaknesses and work toward maturity. The reward is increased resilience, understanding, and influence over time.
a) Consider going to the other person as their servant and asking them what went wrong from their perspective. Listen carefully, and repeat what you hear until the other person thinks you understand their perspective.
b) Ask if they would like to hear your perspective. If not, ask, “What will it take, as far as you are concerned, to make things as right as possible?” Prayerfully consider their response, and ask God what He wants you to do. Loving and forgiving is a given, but there might be something more. If so, do it. Over time evaluate how it is going and ask God if you got it right. The goal is to become a lifelong learner.
c) If the other party agrees to hear your perspective, share it, and then work toward making things as right as possible from both views. Go for the collaborative win/win solution. This is true reconciliation. God wants to help you, but he cannot do it for you.
“Hearing and Understanding vs Agreeing”
Hearing and understanding someone does not mean you have to agree with them.
On the other hand, just because some hears you clearly doesn’t mean they agree with you.
Both hearing and communicating are important first steps to true reconciliation, even if it highlights the chasm between you. Once you both see the rift you can work toward bridge building.
As a mission leader, I used to think it was my responsibility to cast vision and keep the team pulling together in the same direction. One outcome of this thinking is that it took effort for me to listen carefully when someone wanted to do something entirely different. I was busy forming reasons why their idea could have been better in the big picture. I learned that listening carefully, without creating a response while listening, repeating what the other person was thinking in a way they agreed with, and understanding why they thought this was best, is NOT the same as agreeing with them. I learned I could hold several ideas at once. Their ideas. My ideas. Our previous agreements.
Once someone feels wholly heard and understood, they are more likely to be open to hearing my ideas. If, after my best explanation, they still want their idea, we can work toward a mutually agreeable solution.
And . . . it is possible to part ways with honour and respect.
First Among Equals
Greenleaf (2002) suggested an organizational framework where the ultimate authority should be placed in a balanced team of equals under the leadership of a true servant who serves as primus inter pares, first among equals (p. 253).
I like this idea because it is a way to love those around you as you love yourself. For example, suppose you raise your family as a first among equals. In that case, you will respect them, listen to them, work out agreeable solutions whenever possible, and prepare your children as well as possible to launch, when it is time. If you treat your spouse as a first among equals, you will be free to listen openly, respond openly, and not succumb to dominating or being dominated. You will be free to consider others as if they are created in God’s image, and when you do, God is on your side.
Your thoughts? I’d love to hear from you. Hearing from you helps me with my thinking.
References
Greenleaf, R. K. (2002) Servant leadership [25th Anniversary Edition]: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness (p. 253). Paulist Press. Kindle Edition.
