peacemaking

Imagine with me the following conflict situations, noticing how people approach conflict differently.

Ian and Chelsea have been married for two years. The honeymoon stage is over and they’re starting to notice some significant differences in the way they do life. Chelsea is super organized and loves to plan everything while Ian prefers to let life just happen. They’re repeatedly bumping up against this difference in their planning styles. Chelsea would like to work out a compromise while Ian is adamant that his way is the best way. His favorite response when Chelsea is worked up about his lack of planning is, “Just chill, Chelsea, just chill.”

Jacob and Sam have been friends for years. Jacob is more outwardly assertive and typically dictates what they end up doing. Sam doesn’t necessarily like having limited say in what they do, but he feels it’s important to keep the peace. When he has brought it up, Sam has denied that there is any conflict. And besides, Jacob’s ideas are usually pretty good and they end up having a good time.

Emily and Madison are church friends. They’re both married and have young children. Their children often get together for play dates. They’ve recently experienced conflict over their different parenting styles. Emily is stricter and sometimes tries to push rules onto Madison’s kids that Madison doesn’t believe are all that important. They’ve decided to talk about the tension and explore the values and other factors beneath each person’s parenting style. They’re committed to finding a solution that honors what’s good in both approaches and are prepared to compromise a bit, if necessary.

As you can see from these examples, there are different ways of approaching conflict. Allan Simpson and Darrin Hotte, in their Workbook for Engaging Conflict, describe five approaches to conflict: avoid, assert, accommodate, compromise, and cooperate.

Conflict Approaches

Christians seem to have a love-hate relationship with conflict. We love to disagree (there are, after all, approximately 33,000 denominations in the world), yet we often feel bad about engaging in conflict. It somehow feels dirty. As we engage in theological debates and argue about church decor, ministry methods, and a host of other very important matters (or at least they seem important at the time), is there such a thing as healthy conflict?

Conflict naturally occurs when individuals or groups collide over differences in ideas, preferences, or actions.

I’ve only met a few people in my life who relish conflict. Why do we avoid it – sometimes at all costs? I suspect many of us are afraid of entering a complex emotional zone where anything could happen. Or we may fear offending others and being disliked or rejected by them.

There are many personal reasons why we often sidestep controversial issues or gloss over relational tensions; however, our avoidance tactics may also be fuelled by a faulty theological understanding of peacemaking.

How do people called to live as peacemakers engage in peaceful and transformational conflict within the church? The early church did not always engage in healthy conflict. However, the first story in Acts 15 provides some helpful pointers for constructing a peacemaker’s guide to addressing conflict in the church.

1. Engage the issues that divide us
In Acts 15:1–2, a group of Jews from Judea were telling the believers in Antioch they needed to be circumcised. Their teaching resulted in sharp debate with Paul and Barnabas. As a result, the local church leaders appointed these two men, along with some other believers, to bring this question to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem.

I applaud these local church leaders for being willing to pay the price to engage this controversial and divisive issue that had both theological and cultural underpinnings.

The church leaders in Antioch knew that Jesus was the ultimate example of a peacemaker. In Ephesians 2:14–16, we read, “For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.”