Newberger,
Kenneth C. Hope In The Face of Conflict: Making Peace
With Others The Way God Makes Peace With Us. Three Sons Publishing,
SDM, 2009.
Summary
What is the “Judeo-Christian Model of Peacemaking?” Author and leading authority on resolving
church conflict, Kenneth Newberger, offers a 12-step process providing the
foundation for this model calling church members to follow God’s example, as
the perfect peacemaker and guide to true biblical reconciliation. With cases studies and biblical support,
Newberger provides the needed documentation and resources to support this
valuable model.
In the first of four “parts,” Newberger begins
by introducing Matthew 5:9 as the key to unlock the door for his peacemaking
model. The phrase “like father, like
son,” is used as foundation for this process since all efforts for effective
reconciliation must be based upon our own relationship to God, as the Father of
peace and reconciliation. Next, he introduces
three major characteristics in his model of peacemaking, involving love,
reconciliation and mediation.
The second part of the book provides even
further biblical support for the necessity in following God’s example in his
work of reconciliation with mankind.
However, the practical meat of this work is found in the third part
where Newberger unpacks the 12 stages of the model. Finally, the last section gives much needed
guidance for the reader seeking help in selecting the correct approach while
confronting a common misapplication of scripture when handling church conflict.
Significant
Contributions
The greatest contribution of this work is the
biblical support and the reliance on God as the primary foundational example of
true reconciliation. Any teaching that
calls people to follow God’s example in peacemaking is instruction worthy of
consideration and study. The practical,
real-to-life examples also provide much needed application of the author’s
biblical principles.
As God initiates the process of reconciliation
with mankind, so too the hurt individual must initiate the process of peace,
Newberger teaches. While this is
certainly true, one might question the absolute need for outside mediation in
this first step. Could not the dispute
possibly be resolved in a personal conversation between the two parties?
Christ as mediator gives a model for stage two
of the process. The appointed
peacemaker, like Christ, must objectively and justly understand both
perspectives. To do this effectively he
would need to “immerse” himself as a mediator, which requires much time and
commitment. An objective voice is very
valuable in bringing resolution, assuming of course both parties are willing to
hear reasonable advice from the one chosen to mediate.
Just as God clearly displays His vision of
what is just, so too the mediator must establish a reasonable expected outcome
for the parties involved. This prepares
the wrongdoers to more willingly accept potential consequences while ensuring
the aggrieved party is satisfied with the result. This summarizes the author’s
third process called “Envisioning Justice,” but it may be one of the most
important and yet overlooked aspects of the peacemaking process. If the parties involved are not prepared and
willing to accept the outcome of mediation and conflict resolution from the
outset there is no reason to begin.
However, there is more involved than mere
willingness to “swallow the pill” of whatever outcome this reconciliation
process may produce. According to Newberger,
it is the job of the mediator to paint a picture of “Shalomic Peace” in the
same way God gives us a picture of our heavenly peace with Him. So, the parties involved need to expect more
than merely resolving a conflict; they must expect true reconciliation and
restored “Shalomic” peace to the relationship in order to pass through stage
four of this process.
The next stage helps to accomplish this goal
by challenging both parties to walk in each other’s shoes, so to speak. There is nothing more defusing in a dispute
than fully understanding and being fully understood. When the parties come to understand each
other’s reasoning and perspective they may still disagree, but maybe they can
relate and be more willing to forgive.
This might also usher in the sixth, seventh, and eight processes, as the
offending party may begin to see the error of their ways, become willing to
make a genuine apology, and hopefully reparations. Of course, each step of this process is
perfectly modeled by God in scriptures, as eloquently laid out in this work.
The success of this 12-step process hinges on
the parties willingness to place their trust in the chosen mediator, in much
the same way it is incumbent upon all believers to place their trust in
Christ. And just as Christ is willing to
forgive us, the mediator in a dispute must help the parties to see that
forgiveness is to be granted. The author
seems to erroneously presume that forgiveness should only be given if it is
requested, however. One must never
harbor bitterness and unforgiveness in their hearts, even in the face of a
stubborn unrepentant offender. Peace
cannot be held hostage by the hands of sinful and stubborn people.
Of course, the ultimate goal is complete
reconciliation. If that goal is met the eleventh
process is to build on that foundation and work to further that “Shalomic
peace.” And just as Christ continues to
walk with us as a mediator, so too the peacemaker in disputes must follow-up
and help problem solve as needed. A
wound that has been opened can easily be reopened if proper care is not taken
following the reconciliation process.
Critique
While the author’s attempt to prevent a
misapplication of Matthew 18:15-17 is appreciated, it would be an error to
presume that the principles of this passage are only applicable in the cases of
unrepentant sin where a witness is present.
The author’s assumption for needed mediation from the onset seems to
overcomplicate the biblical principle established by Jesus in this well-known
passage.
How can it ever be the wrong procedure to
simply have a conversation with the offending individual? Any offense between two brethren can benefit
from the clear principle of Jesus’ instruction in this passage. The mere willingness for all parties to have
a personal meeting will often bring needed reconciliation before mediation or
other alternatives would even be necessary.
One wonders if the complex twelve-stage process would even be needed in
most situations if this one principle were practiced at the beginning of every
perceived conflict. While the author makes the point well that “the right
procedure used in the wrong circumstances is the wrong procedure,” this
reviewer suggests that a divine principle is always the right principle
regardless of our man-made procedures.
Three Key Insights
First, this work has reminded me to never
overlook the example of God himself as the model for dealing with
conflict. When addressing church members
in my own context, as a pastor and potential mediator, appealing to the
ultimate model of reconciliation gives me the much needed authority and wisdom
to lead well through the process. What
better way to lead the church to make peace with each other than the way in
which God has made peace with us?
Secondly, Newberger’s biblically based
principles are also very much applicable in my home. As a husband and father I have already appealed
to God’s example as peacemaker to help reconcile an otherwise common household
dispute. In doing so, I was able to
interject sound biblical teaching and bring God glory in the midst of mundane
bickering. Typically, separating those
involved and occasionally disciplining one or both parties would stop such
disputes. But, taking the opportunity to
introduce God as our perfect example helps us all remember that He is a
practical example to solve life’s everyday problems. Understanding God knows about our conflict
and speaks to it in scripture is a valuable lesson at any age.
Finally, God used this book to teach me, as a
father of four, that the principle, “Like father, like son,” not only applies
to our relationship with God, but to the relationship with my children. It is one thing to point to God as an
example, but it is something else to submit to that model in your own life and
dealings with others. My wife and
children witness how I respond to conflict on a regular basis and unless I
openly submit to the biblical model of reconciliation I cannot teach them to do
so.
Will, I as a husband, father, and pastor
willingly initiate peace and immerse myself in the lives of those hurting and
needing reconciliation? Will I envision
for them justice, peace, and understanding to help the wrongdoers see the error
of their ways, apologize, and make necessary amends? Will I instill trust as I lead others to
grant forgiveness and build on the spirit of reconciliation? Will I follow-up with concern and the desire
to see peace continue? Will I be a model
of Christ to a world in need of reconciliation?
