CONFLICT AND RECONCILIATION

CONFLICT AND RECONCILIATION

EMILIO CASTRO

‘Can it be true that there are Waldensians who would denounce other Waldensians to the police ?’

‘I can’t. participate in the service you are leading, because we don’t believe in the same things. We believe in the same God, of course, but when it comes to politics and ideology we think in completely different ways. You know that I like you very much as a man and as a pastor, but I cannot listen to you. When you talk about the Scriptures, it doesn’t matter what you are saying. Something inside me asks : why is he saying that ? What are his intentions? I like you very much, but I cannot worship in your church.’

I. The church cannot escape the confficts of the world

The ecumenical movement today involves people from all over the world - people of all colours, races and nationalities. They often seem to be natural enemies. Indeed in the world they have to fight and destroy each other, whether by bullets or by insincere diplomatic politeness. If in the church, despite such distressingly familiar remarks as these I have quoted from my own experience, we are still able to talk to one another sincerely it is simply because we stand in the light of the Cross of Jesus. As long as we remain in that light we will always be able to converse. By being able to talk sincerely, we may also be able on occasion to offer feeble signs of things to come, things not yet possible in the world of today.

Throughout history, however, Christians have stood on opposite sides of secular conflicts. Many readers will have their own memories of international or civil wars in which they found themselves, whether by choice or by necessity, divided from their fellow Christians. War has long been a tragic part of man’s heritage and of the history of Christianity. Perhaps because of our long experience of involvement in wars, we Christians have learnt to accept that fact and to recognize that a temporary break in relationships, even to the point of killing one another, does not mean a fundamental break in the faith which in some way unites us and makes reconciliation possible once the conflict itself is over.

The Rev. EMILIO CASTRO (Methodist, Uruguay) is Director of the Commission on World Mission and Evangelism, World Council of Churches. The article was translated from the Spanish by Helen Franco.

CONFLICT AND RECONCILIATION 287

A new kind of conzict Today, however, we face a different kind of crisis, because division

and conflict are occurring in situations officially considered ‘peaceful’, In other words, the nations are not in open conflict ; so the experience of Christian history is of little immediate help. Recent years have seen the death of the liberal vision of society as that which can hold opposing forces together. The process of radicalization takes the form of a class struggle, whose ideological manifestations face us at all levels and demand global solutions. One of the most pathetic pictures is that of the struggle within the Roman Catholic Church, united in doctrine and even in hierarchical authority but nevertheless shaken by an internal revo- lution which sets in opposition Christians identified with different social groups and ideological positions.

But if the situation is revealed dramatically in the Catholic Church, it is no less serious in other branches of Christianity. The once rock- hard Protestant ideology, which held sacred an ethic based on competi- tive labour, has shattered into a million pieces, and it is hard to find even the lowest of common denominators which can give a raison d’2tre to our separate confessional existence. Divisions arise at every level of confessional and denominational life, divisions which prolong within the Christian Church those already rife in society at large.

The history of Christianity reveals that the Christian church has achieved a relatively stable unity in two extreme situations. The one is when Christianity itself sacralizes the status quo and makes its own the ideology dominant in the community. If believers participate in the totality of the community’s values, it is relatively easy to maintain ideological unity. The other is that of the sect, when Christians submit to an intense common discipline and make of their militancy in the group the centre and meaning of their whole life. When the agenda is not provided by the world in which God acts but is created by the church itself, it is possible to avoid conflict. But as soon as we take seriously the total participation of Christians in the construction of the earthly city, then the different options which clash in the search for social restructuring cannot but penetrate the church and produce the same fears and divisions.

To accept our present situation as a diaspora in the midst of the world’s conf3icts is to accept the presence of these conflicts themselves within the Christian community. Once we are sent to serve in the name of Christ in the different structures of society, it is only logical to expect

288 THE ECUMENICAL REVIEW

that the various commitments which we undertake there will have their counterpart in the internal life of the Christian community.

Living in tension

The tension is a painful one. On the one hand, we understand that the choices we make correspond to our Christian obedience and pre- suppose the overthrow of the injustice inherent in our situation. On the other hand, we find that some of our brothers, whose honesty we cannot doubt, are diametrically opposed to us. Yesterday we all fought together to preach the gospel to an unbelieving world ; today we see with pain that we have no united witness to offer the world, because our views on the problems facing that world place us in conflicting positions. Today we are forced to understand that while we can be united in the depth of Christian love as we share moments of pain or moments of spiritual exaltation in the liturgy, we cannot maintain that unity, because psycho- social forces are gradually separating us from each other.

Not long ago there was excellent cooperation between the churches of different countries at the international level. Missionaries came to our lands as representatives of a liberating gospel. Today, we distrust the countries from which they came, because we see them as responsible for our domination and submission. The great ecumenical assemblies were the place where friendships, understanding and trust grew up. Today, they are a place where we all try to give voice to our respective positions and where we mistrust each other’s ideological loyalties.

11. Liberating conflict and liberating reconciliation Our immediate temptation is to regret this situation deeply and to

seek rapid solutions. Human diplomacy offers us plenty of possibilities : avoiding controversial subjects, seeking compromise wherever possible, abandoning loyalty to our convictions in favour of a unity which we recognize as important and worth preserving. But the letter sent by the Central Committee of the WCC to the churches last year encourages us not to take this line. It invites us to seek another solution - the ‘prophetic ministry of liberating conflict’. Instead of seeking an immediate solution to our differences, the letter asks us to consider whether they can be transformed into a conflict which will make possible our mutual liberation. There is an important presupposition here : that the

2 The Ecumenical Review, Vol. XXIV, No. 4, pp. 474-419.


absence of conflict is not synonymous with peace, that conflict is not in itself destructive of the basic communion which unites us, but rather can help our communion to reach a firm basis. Faith forbids that we cry ‘Peace !’ when there is no peace. Jesus did not hesitate to call the powerful of his time ‘whitened sepulchres’. He rejected the possible roads to compromise suggested by his apostles or even by Pilate himself. He chose rather to follow the conflict to its bitter end.

The Cross reveals the magnitude of human sin and the magnitude of divine love. Without the conflict which reached its climax on the Cross, there can be no clear understanding of the depth of human sin and the glory of the divine offer. An analysis of situations of conflict can of course uncover false reasons for the division. Our cultural and class provincialisms always condition our judgments, but genuine dialogue can lead to mutual correction. At the same time, conflict must be pushed to its final consequences so that the roots of the evil can be revealed. We cannot turn ecumenism into an exercise of mutual con- gratulation ; it must be a true discipline of mutual questioning.

When we take seriously the search for truth in human relations, we will become in the words of the Utrecht letter ‘messengers of strife in a world of false peace’, with all the misunderstandings this brings with it, since the world will not easily admit that its peace is false, and Christians who accept the ideological influences of their milieu tend to share its value judgments.

Christ divides ? It is only from this perspective that we can understand the words

of Dr JosC Miguez Bonino at Utrecht, when he claimed that it was Christ Himself who divides US.^ He was not speaking of a division concerning opinions, but of a division concerning human solutions, in which our powerless and needy fellow humans occupy the centre of our attention. In as much as Christ challenges us to take a stand with the disinherited of the earth, it is He who leads us towards division. Of course, we can be mistaken in our interpretation of the signs of the times and our judgments as to the best ways of raising the disinherited to their central role in history. But the seriousness of our choice is offered in obedience to Jesus Christ. This means that conflict within the Christian church not only repeats to a certain degree the divisions which exist in secular societies, it also deepens them, since the passion

Ibid., p. 470.


and loyalty which mark us as Christians are also present in the various choices we make.

We cannot see the destiny of our neighbour as a marginal issue ; it is a basic choice : we either serve Christ or reject him. Christian conversion - the reorientation of our lives based on acceptance of the pardon and salvation which God offers us in Christ - demands militant discipleship in the service of our neighbour. But it is in the fulfilment of that discipleship that the divisions arise. Hence the burden of the pain which accompanies them. Hence also the creative possibilities within the conflict which oblige us to live with the tension until we find a means of solution.

Another sort of liberty

The Central Committee’s letter to the churches also surprises us with its use of the expression ‘the priestly ministry of liberating reconciliation’. We had understood conflict as arising out of our search for our own liberation and above all for that of our oppressed neighbour. Here, paradoxically, we are called to recognize that reconciliation can also produce liberation.

Our first reaction might be to say that reconciliation is the possibility which arises when the liberating process reaches its climax. But here we are asked to see that reconciliation in itself can be the instrument of that liberation.

Throughout the Scriptures it is clear that reconciliation with God presupposes a stand in favour of our neighbour. Reconciliation produces freedom and makes us slaves of that liberty. The experience of conversion is itself an enlistment on behalf of the liberation of our neighbour. In this sense, the meaning of the Utrecht expression is clear. The preaching of reconciliation, the living out of that reconciliation in the liturgy of the church, the reality of forgiveness granted through Jesus Christ, all produce liberation and raise up new strength for the liberating process as they invite us to join in the mission of God in the world. A question remains : does Christian reconciliation, lived out day by day, have liberating possibilities, or is the only road the permanent search for conflict ?

III. What sort of reconciliation is called for ?

The church has a long tradition as mediator in social conflicts. Over the centuries its presence has provided solace at times of great human

CONFLICT AND RECONCILIATION 29 1

tension. It has been assumed that to a certain extent the church would be above the conflicts which divided society at any given moment. Indeed very recently in the family of the World Council of Churches we have had the example of the churches helping to bring about reconciliation in the Sudan. Yet unfortunately the word of peace and reconciliation has often been pronounced prematurely in order to calm a conflict before it was able to give evidence of its liberating potential. How then can we speak of reconciliation and promote it in such a way that our actions bring about liberation ?

When the risen Christ revealed himself to his disciples, hiding from persecution behind locked doors, he pronounced the word ‘Peace’. How could they believe in peace when they had seen the brutality of the oppression centred on their Master and Lord? Jesus showed them his wounded hands and side. The scars were his credentials. He had occupied the place of the oppressed and the sinner, he had participated in the struggle against demonic powers, he had not remained neutral but had time and time again proclaimed the saving, liberating will of God towards men and suffered the consequences of that proclamation ; he had every right to announce peace.

The word of reconciliation, the Christian church’s gesture of soli- darity, can only be credible when it bears the marks of the Cross, when the church has not remained outside the conflict but has participated in the destiny of the dispossessed.

In God‘s purpose all things are to be summed up in Jesus Christ. That is our goal, and the basis of our life. We move in this eschato- logical tension, amid the conflict which we aim to overcome, in the hope of that reconciliation, whose foundation God has placed in Jesus Christ and whose consummation we will see in the fullness of his Kingdom. Since we participate in God’s mission, pursuing its way amidst the activities of men in history, we live out each situation of conflict in the hope that it will reveal its full liberating potential ; at the same time, we have to establish signs of reconciliation, those symbolic actions which will allow men to believe that the conflict is not final, not absolute, that beyond it lies a promise of reconciliation and fulfilment to which we can aspire.

Credentials for reconciliation

Participation in the suffering and struggle of men for liberation in one part of society provides the credentials by which the Christian com-


munity may play a reconciling role in another. The most dramatic example is, without doubt, that of the peace in Sudan. Because the church had participated in the struggle against racism in the African continent and continually affirmed the African’s right to freedom and justice, it was possible for Christian organizations to participate in the building of bridges of reconciliation between conflicting groups.

In the new missionary situation, now that we are thrust into living in inescapable interdependence, the faithfulness with which we fulfil our mission each in our own countries is the essential support for the mission of the church in other parts of the world. To give an example, the American churches’ participation in the struggle for social justice and the rights of minority groups opens possibilities of service for their missionaries in Africa and Latin America. To put it epigramatically : Liberating participation in conflicts permits us to participate in the reconciliation which will in turn prove liberating in other situations of conflict.

A t the local level

But we need not see this only in terms of great international events. In our own local communities there are conflicts which divide Christians. For example, on occasions when the church has stood by a trade union during a prolonged strike by providing meeting rooms for assemblies, sheltering its leaders while they carry out hunger strikes, helping to publish the causes of the conflicts, there has been tension, criticism, division and dissent. Traditional social service activities of the churches, often criticized for dealing only with the consequences of social evil without attacking its roots, can also be understood as a means of estab- lishing symbols of the reconciliation we seek, not just as a means of patching up the situation by postponing necessary conflict. We have to recognize, however, that there are many situations which simply do not allow the kind of conflict which offers hope of human liberation. Although this judgment has perhaps more to do with political tactics than with theology, we would be blind if we did not recognize the fact that in some semi-closed situations it is premature to try to achieve a truly liberating conflict. The only realistic possibility might be to create partial human encounters bringing about temporary reconciliation in the existing situation. This might be the only way if we are truly searching for a social and emotional basis from which the radical nature of the problems and the resulting conflict can eventually be faced.


Indiscriminate social service - such as Red Cross-type activities - can raise up signs of humanity amid situations of aggressivity, bearing in mind our common participation in man’s ultimate need for livelihood and survival. Social service can also preserve social groups from total submission to enslaving circumstances. When there is no prospect of conditions favourable to the conflict which could bring about radical change in the structure of society and thus in the oppression men suffer, there can still be interim situations in which men can regain courage and become aware of the human dignity which will eventually allow them to face the basic problems. In this sense, ‘reconciliation’, by rescuing man from servility, submission and resentment, and by helping him to become aware of his situation, will be a liberating factor, although at the same time we recognize that such ‘reconciliation’, while it offers possibilities for pursuing more deeply the necessary social dialogue, may also by that same token make the conflict all the more serious.

In other words, the violence implicit in the social situation can be made less acute by Christian social service which eliminates one dimen- sion of social hate. At the same time, however, that same social service can awaken the consciousness of the oppressed to the magnitude of their problems and equip them to raise the questions and indeed pursue the demands which will lead to their liberation.

Continual intercession for peace in situations of conflict, which can similarly be criticized as premature pacification, can be equally seen as a truly liberating possibility. To implore God to intervene, which we criticize if it is taken to mean that the battle will go differently under God’s supervision, provides nevertheless an opportunity to calm our spirits and see the conflict in its true dimensions. Social experience - at least in Latin America - has taught us the importance conflicting groups can on occasion give to the church as providing a certain breathing space in the situation. This can permit the struggle to be humanized and can help avoid the most desperate of solutions. To live out reconciliation in the light of the Cross should at least prevent religious in- tolerance from taking a part in our social conflicts. By religious intoler- ance I do not mean the hatred generated by religious loyalties, but rather that state of emotional exaltation in which hatred becomes the guiding power of human action. To do away with hatred as a key factor in social struggle would be a significant liberation of the combatants. For the struggle for liberty is not carried out only at the level of outward opposition between men, but within each human conscience. To the


extent that we believe that all men have a common destiny, a tomorrow towards which we all strive and which has been affirmed by God in Jesus Christ - in which we shall have to meet as brothers - we are already helping to eliminate irrational factors in our conflicts.

IV. Obedient conflict - obedient reconciliation

This is the tension in which we must live knowing that God calls us to share in the search for the liberation of man and of the community. By enrolling ourselves in that struggle in obedience to God, we run the risk of the errors which accompany human choices, but we seek liberation on the basis of the knowledge of the freedom which has been given us in Jesus Christ and it is that freedom which we affirm at all levels of life. It brings us face to face with our neighbour, with our brother : the brother God has given us, not the one we have chosen. In this situation, through loyalty to the Christ who shows himself to us in our needy brothers, we find ourselves having to oppose other brothers. In obedience to the promise of freedom we have to accept the conflict. Sheltering in the promise of forgiveness, we can base our lives on the reconciliation worked by God in Jesus Christ. Seeking the expression of the reconciliation which corresponds to the unity God wishes for all his children, we attempt to discern the signs of divine action in our contemporary history. Since it is by God that we are reconciled, we can afford to take roads of obedience which are not all alike. In the permanent process of meeting and going apart, in committing ourselves and in starting all over again, we have a foretaste of a reconciliation which does not yet belong to us but for which we hope in its fullness. Now we see only in part ; then we hope to see clearly. We already belong to each other, since we belong to Christ and to his mission. In the painful hope and certainty of future meeting, we obediently preach and participate in the conflict which creates freedom ; in obedience we announce and raise signs of a reconciliation which.is the anticipation and guarantee of our final freedom.

Documents

CONFLICT AND RECONCILIATION