title

:

Helping Resolve Conflict : True Experiences of a Christian Anthropologist Peace and Justice Series ; 10

author

:

Friedmann, I. M.

publisher

:

Herald Press

isbn10 | asin

:

0836135210

print isbn13

:

9780836135213

ebook isbn13

:

9780585239934

language

:

English

subject

Peace--Religious aspects--Christianity, Conflict management--Religious aspects--Christianity, Friedmann, I. M.,--1922-

publication date

:

1990

lcc

:

BT736.4.F734 1990eb

ddc

:

261.8/73

subject

:

Peace--Religious aspects--Christianity, Conflict management--Religious aspects--Christianity, Friedmann, I. M.,--1922-

Page 3

PEACE AND JUSTICE SERIES 10

Helping Resolve Conflict

True Experiences of a Christian Anthropologist

I. M. Friedmann

Page 4

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Friedmann, I. M., 1922-

Helping resolve conflict : stories of a Christian anthropologist / I. M. Friedmann.

p. cm.  (Peace and justice series ; 10)

Includes bibliographical references

ISBN 0-8361-3521-0

1. PeaceReligious aspectsChristianity. 2. Conflict

managementReligious aspectsChristianity. 3. Friedmann,

I. M., 1922- . I. Title. II. Series.

BT736.4.F734 1990

261.8'73dc20                       90-36003

CIP

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information SciencesPermanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.

HELPING RESOLVE CONFLICT

Copyright © 1990 by Herald Press, Scottdale, Pa. 15683 Published simultaneously in Canada by Herald Press, Waterloo, Ont. N2L 6H7. All rights reserved.

Library of Congress Catalog Number: 90-36003

International Standard Book Number: 0-8361-3521-0

Printed in the United States of America

Design by Gwen M. Stamm

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 96 95 94 93 92 91 90

Page 5

Contents

Foreword

7

Introduction

9

1. How I Became a Peacemaker

13

2. When Mission Societies Clash

17

3. When Missionaries and National Christians Clash

22

4. When Immigrants and Local Tribespeople Clash

27

5. The Way Africans Make Peace

52

6. How a Peacemaker Works

57

7. When a Peacemaker Serves As a Catalyst

63

8. How Ancestors Help Africans Make Peace

66

9. When the Marriage Bond is Broken

69

10. Making Peace with One's Own Past

74

11. Children Can Make Peace with Their Parents

79

12. Parents Can Make Peace with Their Children

85

Bibliography

91

The Author

92

Peace and Justice Series

94

Page 7

Foreword

Living with conflict is part of being human. The important point is how we handle conflict. Dealt with wisely, conflict can make us better people. Handled unwisely, it can destroy us and those we love. Though we are tempted to see conflict as one-sided, this is rarely true. Both sides contribute to a conflict. Some societies tend to focus on punishing the wrongdoer rather than on restoring peace and unity between the parties in conflict.

The author has studied human behavior and worked in many conflict situations. The stories he shares here offer helpful insights for managing a wide variety of conflicts.

His approach allows the stories to communicate important truths that can be applied in many situations. In most cases, the conflicting parties are led to discover for themselves the actions needed to resolve the tension or anger.

He shows how a mediator works at rebuilding relationships much the way a master builder con-

Page 8

structs a housecarefully and insightfully. Rather than emphasizing what has been, the sensitive mediator works at helping each party focus on what can be.

Each chapter of the book ends with questions for reflection or action. The material is designed to show wholesome ways to work at conflict resolution. The book is number ten in a series on peace and justice listed inside the back cover. For further reading on the theme, check the resources in the back.

J. ALLEN BRUBAKER, EDITOR

PEACE AND JUSTICE SERIES

Page 9

Introduction

Peace or nonresistance, as Mennonites often expressed it, was one of the great insights of our early Anabaptist/Mennonite forebears. But once we recognize them we need to translate such insights into meaningful action.

Now problems, when they arise, are usually caused by the way we express such insights rather than by the insights themselves. At different times or in different settings, the same expression may convey very different meanings.

During World War I, Mennonites in Russia found service in Russian forests a meaningful alternative service to the state. However, when a similar forestry service was begun in the forests of British Columbia during World War II, many of the well-meaning young Mennonite volunteers were severely disillusioned.

They saw it as a more or less meaningless avoidance of involvement in war. As one of the government camp supervisors put it, "You fellows are here

Page 10

in the boondocks so you don't attract the attention of Canadian patriots. As long as you remain here quietly, we are not concerned about what you achieve."

After the war, Canada immediately dropped conscription, and so the need to express the peace truth in action disappeared. For most Mennonites, nonresistance became meaningful only in times of war.

I personally tried the second kind of alternative service, also developed in Russiamedical service. However, my reaction was similar to that expressed by the forestry camp participants. My alternate service lacked a positive peace testimony.

Furthermore, I felt that the peace insight of our fathers and mothers ought to be expressed meaningfully at all times, in times of peace as well as war. In the following chapters I will share both my struggles and the meaning I found by practicing peacemaking as part of my daily life.

To help you read this booklet with understanding, I want to explain the following words. They express crucial ideas.

Peace

An agreement to end hostilities and to come together in friendship made by those who have been at war or in a state of enmity or dissension; a formal reconciliation between disputing parties.

Conscientious Objector

One who for conscience' sake objects to warfare and military service.

Page 11

The Ban, Shunning

An early Anabaptist practice of excluding wayward individuals from the fellowship, ostracizing them religiously and socially.

An even larger number of terms come from the science of anthropology. It has provided me with many useful insights into human conflicts and peacemaking. Here are terms and concepts drawn from anthropology.

Sponsor, Sponsorship

When a member of an in-group brings into the group and assumes responsibility for an outsider, he or she is said to sponsor the outsider. The act is called sponsorship.

Culture Broker

A person who knows different cultures intimatelyand who then helps people from these cultures understand and deal with the differences that create problems between them and other cultural groups.

Trade Language

A second language used by people who cannot speak each other's native languages, for purposes of trade and other elementary communication with each other.

Indigenous

Growing or living naturally in a country. Here it is used to describe people native to a region. It is also used as a label for a self-supporting, self-governing, self-propagating church free from foreign missionary control.

Page 12

Catalyst

The agent of catalysis, a reaction produced by a substance (called a catalyst) which itself may be recovered more or less unchanged at the end of the reaction.

Losing Face

In many societies, shame is experienced as "a loss of face," i.e., one is publicly faced with a failure, a wrong, or a weakness. Societies that do not stress guilt often stress loss of face.

Now let me introduce myself.

Page 13

Chapter 1

How I Became a Peacemaker

During World War II, I refused to bear arms. I chose instead to work in a hospital. Even though I was helping sick people, I felt frustrated. My work did not seem like the positive witness for peace I thought my alternative service should represent. It seemed to be mostly a negative stance against war rather than a positive step toward peace. Then and there I decided I would look for more meaningful expressions of my peace principles.

But I largely forgot this fine wartime resolution during my university studies and some ten years of missionary service which followed. When I was forced out of the mission setting, however, and became a college professor, it surfaced again.

First, I tried to involve myself in the race conflict in the United States. But I found little satisfaction in marches, demonstrations, and sit-ins, especially when I considered the motivations of many of my fellow marchers.

Later I became a translation consultant with the

Page 14

United Bible Societies. I worked first in South America, with responsibility for the entire continent. Then I served in Africa, beginning with responsibility for seven countries in East Africa and concluding with five countries in West Africa. In all these settings, I worked with many missions, churches, and groups of national peoples interested in the Scriptures or engaged in translating them. My assignment put me in situations where I could not only observe conflict situations firsthand. I could also work actively as a peacemaker in some of them.

Furthermore, my training in anthropology had made me aware of problems which grew out of my own culture and church background. Through my awareness of other cultures, I had come to realize that I grew up thinking conflict could be resolved by force or punishment. My culture considered the following to be the correct way to resolve a conflict: (1) Find out who is guilty and who is innocent. (2) Ascertain the degree of guilt of the guilty party. (3) Hand out punishment appropriate to the degree of guilt.

My church practiced a similar approach. It seldom saw both parties as contributing to a conflict. For example, in a marriage breakup, either the wife or the husband was blamed and the person considered guilty was excommunicated. Seldom did the church see the guilt or sin as shared by both parties. Worse, even voluntary confessions seemed to demand that the church punish the repentant wrongdoer.

Page 15

I also had learned that the punitive approach to conflict resolution prevailing in many cultures can be dangerous. This is especially true if one of the rivals makes a one-sided decision about the other's guilt, then proceeds to avenge the wrong. This often leads to an endless cycle of revenge, which can continue long after the original conflict has been forgotten.

On the other hand, my study of human behavior and my experience with cultures in the two-thirds world had shown me that most of these societies had little interest in punishing the people involved in a conflict. They were much more concerned with restoring peace and group unity whenever conflict developed. Often they seemed uninterested in discovering who the guilty party was. In fact, they often weren't even concerned about whether the alleged event had actually happened. The mere accusation was enough to set in motion their peacemaking processes.

Nor were they content with peacemaking. Their procedures actually introduced social barriers which prevented divisive actions from happening. Thus, if the alleged wrong involved an event that had not yet happened, the barriers introduced during their communal discussions of the accusations made it unlikely such an event could ever happen. If the wrong had occurred, their discussions made repeating it difficult.

To my pleasant surprise, many tribal societies used some truly healing approaches in their resolution of conflict. Rather than trying to establish the

Page 16

guilt or innocence of contending parties, these groups tended to work toward an equal loss of face for both accusers and accused. They tried to prevent leaving a ''root of bitterness" which could fester and then break out in renewed conflict later.

The chapters which follow recount actual experiences in conflict resolution.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. Do you agree that establishing guilt or innocence in conflict situations is not always helpful? Why or why not?

2. If both parties in a conflict acknowledge their part in it, how might this help them to resolve it?

3. This chapter describes a punitive approach to conflict which often leads to endless cycles of revenge. What positive alternative is suggested? Could such an alternative approach be helpful in your community?

4. What forms of alternative service should conscientious objectors to war consider for the future? If World War I forestry work was irrelevant in World War II, will we need to get ready for new and relevant alternatives for the future? What are our peacetime expressions of our peace principles? How meaningful are they?

Page 17

Chapter 2

When Mission Societies Clash

Mission societies used to work under so-called goodwill agreements. These unwritten understandings were designed to prevent one mission society from entering an area where another was already working. Yet conflicts could still arise. For example, two missions, as they reached out from their starting location, might begin working with the same group of people at different points. Both societies could remain ignorant of the other's work for years, if not decades. Eventually, however, they would realize both were working with the same group of people.

Then if the local people preferred the work of one mission over that of the other, accusations would surface: "You're invading our area." "You're stealing our sheep." Thus, long before members of these mission societies actually met, they often developed negative attitudes toward each other.

In one such instance, the United Baptist Mission (UBM) entered the Amorreo tribe from the north-

Page 18

east. After several decades it had established some 12 United Baptist churches. Meanwhile the Evangelical Congregation Church (ECC) began working with the closely related Wamurreo in the southwest corner of the same territory. Eventually, however, their work also reached the Amorreo territory in the northeast.

Early in its work, ECC found its mission effort being systematically frozen out by a Pentecostal-type people's movement. This movement had spontaneously taken hold among the Wamurreo. Not only their mission, but a half-dozen other churches and missions found themselves locked out of the Wamurreo territory as this people's movement continued to take over. Most of these missions were unwilling to cooperate with a movement they could not control and with which they disagreed doctrinally. They felt the movement included too many cultural practices that did not line up with true Christian faith.

The ECC, however, decided to stay. It began to use a friend-of-the-court approach to help the Pentecostal movement become more biblical. It helped the indigenous movement become a legal entity, totally separate from the ECC denomination the missionaries represented. This people's movement continued to grow. Finally it reached the farthest boundaries of the tribe, including the Amorreos in the northeast. Eventually, the movement also reached the dozen or so denominational churches of the UBM among the Amorreos. When its evangelists reached this area, many individuals

Page 19

and sometimes entire congregations left the UBM to join the people's movement.

As the missionaries of UBM traced the origin of these evangelists, they discovered that the ECC was associated with the people's movement. Seeing their own churches crumble, they were increasingly upset by what they felt was ECC "sheep stealing." They were unaware that the ECC had no control over this indigenous movement.

Since both missions were engaged in Bible translation, I, as a regional Bible Society translation consultant, had occasion to visit both groups. In the process, I became intimately acquainted with the situation, including the bad feelings being generated among the UBM workers toward the ECC. When the UBM invited me to lead them in a spiritual retreat for their missionary staff, I accepted their request on condition that they also invite an ECC missionary. The UBM eventually accepted this condition and invited the leader of the ECC Mission.

During the retreat, I suggested that the leaders of the two missions meet to discuss the tension that had developed between them. The ECC missionary, a shy, soft-spoken person, always hesitated to put himself forward. The leader of the UBM was older, authoritarian, and quite aggressive. He at once began to give the visiting ECC missionary "a piece of his mind." The visitor was deeply embarrassed by the harsh, unfounded accusations ("sheep stealing," "church destroying") hurled at him.

As the attacker grew more emotional, the visitor

Page 20

withdrew even more. He struggled hard to control his emotions, his face frozen in a smile. This smile so infuriated the attacker that he finally shouted, "Wipe that satanic grin off your face! You are of the devil, you church-destroyer!"

During the verbal attack, I dropped to my knees. When the attacker stopped for breath, I intervened. "Do you realize that the visitor's smile is a mask? That man is not laughing, he is struggling to hold back his tears."

As soon as I had said this, the visiting missionary also fell to his knees, in tears, blurting out a prayer, "I don't want to be the devil! God, you know I am innocent of the accusations."

A tense silence followed. During the silence the attacker finally also knelt down. Eventually, the ECC accused sobbed out more of his prayer: "God, I promised you I would stand by this indigenous church, even though I have no control over it. If you demand that I be the devil in the eyes of the UBM here, God, I am willing to even be that. . . ."

More silence! Finally, the UBM attacker himself began to pray. He poured out his frustrations and anger before God. The meeting ended in a mutual embrace of forgiveness and release. Both agreed to see how their respective missions could cooperate in the future to help the indigenous church grow in knowledge of, and obedience to, God's Word.

Questions for Discussion and Reflection

1. How can a mediator help both sides discover truth rather than evade it?

Page 21

2. True conflict resolution involves release of anger. How can one do this nonviolently?

3. Do churches in North America run into the turf problems the ECC and UBM experienced? How are they handled?

Page 22

Chapter 3

When Missionaries and National Christians Clash

When the concept of self-governing national churches began to take concrete form between 1950 and 1960, most missionaries and mission societies accepted it in principle. Many of them, however, felt that the national churches they were working with or establishing were still not ready to put this concept into practice. Missionaries therefore said little about giving such autonomy to the churches they were establishing.

Meanwhile, the national (as opposed to foreign) leaders being nurtured by the denominational missions were no longer receiving in-country training only. Many young leaders were now studying in Europe and in North America. They attended some of the major schools of the denominations sending

Page 23

missionaries. Here they were exposed to the concept of autonomous indigenous churches.

The concept gripped them; they were determined to implement it. Thus when they returned to their home countries to assume leadership in the churches, they immediately wanted to make them self-governing. But they found that the local missionaries, with backing from their mission societies at home, were dragging their feet.

The mission society unwillingness to practice an obviously accepted principle increasingly frustrated these younger, foreign-trained leaders. In some cases, their frustration led them to campaign actively against the missionaries' hold over the national churches. In some areas, the campaign to undo the missionaries' control and to install autonomous national leadership became more or less countrywide.

Thus both denominational and faith mission churches were pulled into the conflict. The harder the nationals pushed for independence, however, the more the missionaries resisted it. In desperation some of the more aggressive national leaders decided to ask the national government to expel all foreign missionaries from their country.

In one Latin-American country, the local Bible society director, a national, as were the agitators (but foreign-trained), saw the danger ahead. He began to work for a mediated solution. He convinced the missionaries and the nationals that they could trust me, the regional translation consultant, to serve as mediator. Since I had been a missionary, I was acceptable to the missionaries. The Bible Soci-

Page 24

ety director also succeeded in convincing enough of his people to trust me. Eventually both groups agreed to meet with me face-to-face.

I accepted the request under several conditions. First, I wanted a "cover," so reconciliation could go on quietly behind the scenes, without public fanfare.

Second, I wanted both sides to commit themselves to let the other side speak without restriction.

Third, they must permit me, as mediator, to try to isolate the cultural or doctrinal issues that underlay the concerns expressed.

The cover came in the form of an invitation from the National Association of Evangelical Churches and Missions in that country. They asked me to serve as speaker for a week of "Deeper Christian Life" studies for pastors and lay leaders. I was to present these studies nightly in a large auditorium in the capital city. They would be open to the public. This gave both me and the pastors and missionaries a reason to be in town. Furthermore, the public evening sessions permitted the mornings and afternoons of that week to be used for the closed-door reconciliation efforts.

This was the format of the reconciliation effort: Each day the missionaries and nationals would alternate in leading the morning and afternoon sessions. During the session, individuals from the group in charge could present their concerns (up to one-half hour in length). After each presentation, I would then try to identify the issues that un-

Page 25

derlay what had been said. This enabled the two groups to address the issues rather than react to the feelings expressed.

The first few meetings produced only stubborn position statements and yielded little common ground. The breakthrough came during the third afternoon. A national who had recently returned from overseas studies poured out bitterness that often verged on venom. Even though he spoke for more than the allotted half hour, I allowed him to pour it all out.

The gist of his outburst was, "We nationals are the missionaries' manure. Through us they grow rich and fat. They gloat over our depravity, our filth, our sin, because it makes their bank accounts swell. The things that make us hang our heads in shame provide the pungent manure they and the overseas church people love to hear and to repeat. Our manure produces moneymuch money, but not for the growth of national churches. It is all for the individual missionary's wealth."

So bitter was his outpouring that missionaries began to cover their ears. They called on me to stop the tirade. Eventually the language turned so violent even the nationals hissed, which was their cultural signal for the young pastor to stop. Overruling them all, I allowed the speaker to get "everything off his chest."

When he finally finished, I asked both the missionaries and the nationals what this young man had been talking about. No missionaries seemed to have understood. No nationals were willing to

Page 26

speak. I then pointed out that the young man had been talking about missionary reports, specifically their prayer letters. These are letters missionaries, especially faith missionaries, write home to raise support. The gorier the sin described, the more it stirs the hearts of the home crowd and the greater their contributions to the cause.

Once the issue was in the open, the young man actually produced several letters written by missionariessome of whom were present. These were letters well-meaning church people in North American had received and passed on to the young man during his studies in the North.

It did not take long for the missionaries to see that reporting local sin and filth to stir up missionary support was wrong.

In tears, many of them asked their national brothers for forgiveness. The next two days were spent in mutual confessions of failures and mistakes. Finally all the participants knelt as penitents at the cross of Christ to receive God'sand each others'forgiveness. The sessions climaxed in an interdenominational communion service.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. Identify three steps (used in the story above) for resolving conflicts between two groups.

2. Can you identify a conflict situation where these steps might be applied?

3. How might traditional church members be insensitive to new believers, as missionaries were toward new believers in cross-cultural settings?

Page 27

Chapter 4

When Immigrants and Local Tribespeople Clash

''One wants to become a human being. . . . " The words hung in the air, indicating that the statement was far from complete. As the visiting anthropologist, I was startled by the force with which the words were spoken. All I had really asked this group of Aloso was to state their deepest desire.

"One wants to become a person. . . . " Deliberately, I repeated the statement as I looked from one face to another gathered around the small fire of oil-rich wood that was giving more light than warmth. As if being polled individually, the people solemnly repeated, "Yes, one wants to become a human being, too."

Nor was this handful of tribespeople the only group voicing such feelings. Group after group I

Page 28

visited made similar affirmations. Obviously these former hunting and gathering warrior-nomads felt their status was being seriously threatened. The breadth of their response showed the threat was felt tribe-wide. The force with which they uttered it testified eloquently to the depth of their feeling.

In this chapter I will describe some of the factors that brought the self-image of the Aloso under attack. I will recount some actions the group tried in their efforts to redeem their self-image. Finally, I will show that often it is easier to be reconciled with God than with our Christian neighbors.

Before the Arrival of the Immigrants

Before the European immigrants arrived and established colonies, these Aloso were nomadic hunters and gatherers. Their folktales and folk history tell of many daring exploits against enemy tribes, against European conquerors, and most recently, against troops of the neighboring country.

Despite their heroic tales, these people had been defeated so decisively they now lived in constant fear of being massacred by soldiers.

Their first peaceful contacts with Western civilization were apparently with sugarcane growers. They employed the Aloso for five or six months of each year to harvest sugarcane. The sugar industry had wisely made its agreements with the chiefs, to whom the employers gave retainer wages. The chiefs did not actually work. They merely made the agreements and settled the disputes between employers and their Aloso laborers when difficulties

Page 29

arose during the contract period.

The sugar company gave their Aloso employees only half their wages each month during the employment period. When the season ended, the workers received the other half in a lump sum. This was intended to provide for their survival during the slack season. Coincidentally, the off months corresponded to the wild carob bean season in their hunting area. So, armed with some cash and able to get plenty of easy food and drink in the extensive carob forests, the tribespeople spent several months feasting and celebrating.

The work in the sugarcane fields, however, introduced the Aloso to hard liquor and prostitution. Both these vices gravely concerned the tribal leaders.

They therefore decided to discontinue their work in the cane fields and to seek their fortune with some recently arrived European immigrants. The latter were just then settling in the region adjacent to the tribe's traditional hunting territory. Thus, a few years after the arrival of the immigrants, members of this tribe began to appear in the European colonies, especially on the southwestern rim of the area they occupied.

Animals and Fences

Eventually, the whole Aloso tribe left its traditional wandering territory and formed satellite villages near the existing European settlements. Here they found seasonal employment. They had traditionally practiced limited animal husbandry, so with

Page 30

them came an assorted collection of sheep, goats, cows, horses, and innumerable dogs. During the pioneer years wire fencing was at a premium, so many of the settlers' fields were inadequately protected by fences. The animals of the tribespeople often did extensive damage. This soon became a source of severe tension between the two groups.

A number of the white villages tried to solve the problem by building a fence around a plot of land assigned to the tribal village. This greatly eased the mounting tension. But eventually pressures of various types caused the tribespeople to dispose of all their domestic animals except their dogs.

Missions to other tribal groups had already been established, so a new mission was now opened for the Aloso. This gave them interpreters and protectors. Whenever problems arose between colonists and the tribespeople, the colony authorities generally asked the missionaries to mediate. The missionaries' understanding of tribal culture and their fluency in the Aloso language permitted fairly adequate explanation in both directions. In time this became the official pattern for working out differences. Both the mission and the European colonies held the tribal leaders responsible for any breaches of discipline by tribespeople.

Women's Loss of Authority

Possibly the most harmful cultural upset caused by contact with the immigrant settlers was the loss of authority and responsibility suffered by tribal women.

Page 31

The Aloso tribe had traditionally been strongly female-oriented. The females chose their casual sex partners and finally their marriage partners. During their hunting and gathering life, women had certain responsibilities fixed by the society's sexual division of labor. Husbands brought home the game and sighted wild honey. The women then collected the wild honey. They also prepared the game for food and treated the hides to make clothing or bedding. In general, husbands did the hunting, wives did the gathering. Being nomadic, they moved frequently. When to move and where to go was a decision generally made by the women. Once the move had been made, the women also built their new stick-and-grass shelters.

In the area of child-training, women were supreme, for they alone were able to build a "human soul" in a newborn child. Mother's milk was the great food of the soul; the child lived on it for four or five years. In addition, the mother's love, care, and constant presence nurtured the child's development. The child also received most early training from the mother, except sex education. This was the responsibility of the child's grandmother on the mother's side. She continued the child's education after the mother weaned it. Mother and grandparents also disciplined the child.

The move to the colonies, however, changed all of this. Indeed, the very foundation of the female's reason for being was unintentionally but dangerously undermined. Since the tribespeople now lived more or less permanently in one of the satellite vil-

Page 32

lages, no one needed to decide when or where to move. There were no temporary homes to build anymore. There were no hides to tan, for husbands no longer went hunting. There were no roots to gather, for the tribespeople's permanent residence soon exhausted the supply of roots in the area. It now became physically impossible for the women to fulfill most of their former responsibilities.

How Money Became a Part of the Problem

The preceding did not end the attack on the Aloso women's reason for being. During the early contacts, when the tribe worked largely for food and clothing, the employers had often provided food for the whole family. Later, wages were paid in yard goods, which were attractive to women.

Eventually, as this form of payment became unwieldy, the white settlers paid money wages. They made arrangements with the men they hired. The wives were not even consulted. To add insult to injury, the employers fed their male employees three meals a day, for they wanted their workers to be able to do a solid day's work.

Under the money economy, the European settlers, instead of giving food to the whole tribal family, often ordered their Aloso male employees to plant gardens for themselves and their families on the settlers' land. This made the husband responsible for something that had always been the wife's domain.

Last but not least, money belonged to the tribe's category of private property. Such property was re-

Page 33

garded as entirely individual, so much so that it had to be buried with the owner at his death. It was considered not only undesirable but extremely dangerous for all nonowners to handle someone else's private property.

The introduction of money therefore led to many serious complications. Money became the instrument by which the men could enforce their new position of exclusive authority. A practical example of the use of money as a weapon can be seen in the following illustration of the change in husband-wife relations.

The culture did not permit a mother to have sex relations during the four to five years she nursed her child. During this period, the husband joined the unmarried and satisfied his sexual needs there. When male missionaries (early missionary wives did not learn the language) brought Christianity to the tribe, they also taught Christian morality. They insisted on fidelity to one wife. Husbands now wanted to live with their wives even during the nursing period.

Wives, however, resisted their husband's sexual approaches because they were under a strong taboo. Sexual relations during breastfeeding, they believed, would damage the mother's milk and prevent the development of the child's soul. This would also cripple the child's body. But now husbands could force their wives into sexual submission with their newly gained weaponmoney. Until their wives submitted to their sexual advances, they withheld food and clothing.

Page 34

Although the women were hurt by their husband's behavior, their major resentment was directed against the European settlers. Contact with them had led to this drastic change in their husbands. As a result, the women blamed the Europeans for their loss of status and authority, if not their very reason for being.

At first the European settlers had accepted the previously established pattern of the chiefs negotiating for the whole clan. But this soon changed. As the tribespeople became more aware of what wages were just, the chiefs began to bargain for better conditions for the laborers.

The colonists, resenting this, sought ways to undercut the chiefs' role. No longer acknowledging the chiefs as sole voice of the clan, they began to bargain with individuals. Only in misdemeanor cases was a chief's authority recognized and used by the colonists. Well aware of this sidestepping of their authority, the chiefs looked for new ways to bolster their authority and prestige.

In public the settlers were able to negotiate successfully with individuals. In private, however, the tribespeople felt dissatisfied. They felt deeply exploited. The chiefs, of course, encouraged these feelings. Occasionally, tribespeople "helped themselves" to some settlers' property to equalize the return.

They patterned this after their traditional method of exchange, in which the original giver, rather than the taker, was responsible for a just return. The original giver was entitled to take from the

Page 35

original receiver whatever he felt was his due.

While the wage situation permitted the worker to feel cheated, another factor made the entire Aloso tribe simmer with resentment. For a decade already, a neighboring tribe, the Warai, had been participating in an agricultural settlement program begun by a mission. By this time, the Warai had already established a number of agricultural villages, while the Aloso had not participated in any such program. (This was at least in part because the Aloso were living in satellite villages near the "urban" centers of the European colonies.)

This inequality in the mission programs eventually caused a reaction. The Aloso complained that whites were biased in favor of the Warai and were discriminating against the Aloso through the agricultural settlement program. This perceived inequality became one of the factors that triggered a rebellion, as we will describe later.

Disputes Over Land and Water

Another problem was probably unique to two villages in the most recently settled of the white colonies. These villages were located on land the Aloso claimed as their own. Thus, with the first harvest by the colonists, several tribal chiefs came to collect a tribute of food or cloth for the use of "their" land. The settlers did not want to tangle with tribespeople whose language they did not understand. Furthermore, they had heard that the Aloso were dangerous, so they simply paid the small rental fees the chiefs demanded. Later, when the

Page 36

tribespeople began to work for the colonists, this demand for rental fees gradually disappeared. But their claim on the land remained unchanged.

These white villages were settled by people who had undergone trying experiences during the last European war. As a result, they had acquired a "watch-out-only-for-yourself" attitude. They sponsored no mission program for tribespeople. Few learned to speak the tribal language. The Aloso's domestic animals soon became a problem in this situation. The settlers just reached for their firearms and shot the offending animals, intending to teach the tribespeople a lesson. Faced with such drastic action, the Aloso quickly disposed of their domestic animalsbut not their deep resentment.

We noted that in the other colonies the white settlers had enclosed land the tribespeople could claim as village, garden, and herding areas. In the two villages under discussion, however, the settlers' struggle for personal survival was so absorbing that they undertook nothing similar.

The reverse happened, in fact. As individual European settlers expanded their acreage, claiming land as their private property, they forced tribes-people to vacate site after site. It was 15 years before this group actually received a fenced plot of land in which they could establish a secure village. But they held questionable title to even this plot. A white farmer claimed the land was actually his by colony assignment, and only by the goodness of his heart did he permit the tribespeople to continue living there.

Page 37

Another acute problem was the lack of a well for drinking water. The wells in the area were deep, and sweet water was scarce. Even the settlers had had to draw water from a common well for many years. This, of course, meant that the tribespeople had to use the same well. This sharing caused much tension. The whites did not like ''filthy natives" drawing water from their well. Rather than digging a separate well for the Aloso, however, the whites permitted their children to harass the tribespeople who came to the well. Only after the first rebellion did the white settlers finally help the newly fenced tribal village get its own well.

Another irritant was language. The tribespeople had already learned the local trade language, so they resisted and resented learning the vernacular the colonists spoke. The colonists, however, learned neither the local trade language nor the Aloso language.

This caused communication problems. Inability to understand each other led to mutual suspicion, much of it justified. Whites suspected the tribes-people of stealing. Tribespeople felt they were being robbed by the low wages the settlers paid them. When a theft was discovered, the lack of communication offered little chance of identifying the actual thief. Frustrated white villagers just seized tribespeople at random and beat them vigorously. This, they explained, was a lesson for both the guilty and the innocent. There was to be no stealing at all!

The tribespeople's suspicions were further

Page 38

heightened by variations in the settlers' reaction toward them. During the cotton harvest, for example, the colonists pampered them so they would work hard at gathering the cotton. But the colonists' welcome passed with the harvest season. Then the colonists refused to feed those indigenous people who came begging for food. Sometimes they even drove them away. To the locals, this was an indication that the whites hated them; they only tolerated them for personal gain.

The Rebellious Outburst

Several years later, a severe drought hit the entire area. Faced with scarcity, the white settlers began conserving their resources as usual. They laid off all tribal workers. They rationed their food so they would have enough to feed themselves through the drought.

The layoffs spelled disaster for the Aloso. They had become entirely dependent on the income and food provided by the settlers. They had no resources of their own. In fact, they were even forgetting the survival methods of their former hunting and gathering life.

The problem became worse because they now had more mouths to feed. Under mission influence, the tribespeople had discontinued their traditional disposal of surplus infants. To the Aloso people, the settlers' move to conserve resources seemed totally irresponsible and heartless. Did not good people always share resources, especially in times of need? Had the tribespeople not helped raise the very

Page 39

food the white settlers were now hoarding for themselves? Did not much of the hoarded food actually represent wages owed the tribespeople?

Tribespeople-settler relations were bad. The settlers held all the land. Most tribespeople did not even have gardens of their own. Because of their desperate situation, the indigenous people tried the only avenue they knew. They appealed to the whites' pity by begging daily, especially from those who had employed them. At first the settlers responded. But gradually, as the scarcity worsened, they gave less and gave it less willingly.

The colonists appealed for outside help for the tribespeople. A relief agency channeled some supplies to the area. But the amount was so limited that it had to be designated for children, pregnant women, the sick, and the aged only. Able-bodied persons were expected to hunt, work, or find their own food.

When this relief food arrived at the tribal village, the mayor of the white colony and a missionary brought along an indigenous person from a different subtribe as teacher. Publicly, he was to conduct a school for the children (since part of the supplies had been designated for school lunches). But privately, he was to supervise the distribution of the supplies. Having been humiliated again and again by white villagers, the tribespeople interpreted this as another insult. This time, though, it came directly from the highest officials of the colony and the mission.

The local chief, of course, saw the teacher as a

Page 40

puppet chief to be defied at all costs. As a result, the group excluded the teacher and forbade all tribespeople to accept any handout from him. To feed themselves, they began to steal sweet potatoes, grain, chickens, pigs, and even cattle from their colonist employers. They justified the action as simply taking things the settlers had been withholding from them. They feared the outcome, of course. What if the immigrants called in the soldiers? Punishments were extremely severe in the area, especially for rustling cattle.

The teacher, even though put out, pleaded with the tribespeople. This only angered them more. They threatened to kill him as a traitor. Meanwhile, night after night, they held war councils. They sent out parties to raid and bring back food. Should they also kill some of the worst white offenders? Fear of the soldiers deterred them at first.

Then the top chief sent a message. He had gone to the government authorities. They promised help. This raised the tribespeople's hopes again and delayed their intended vengeance. The chief sent a second message: the government was giving the Aloso land and implements for settlement.

This hope changed their tactics. Instead of killing the offending settlers, thus asking for punishment, the group decided to abandon the white colony at once. All would settle on their own land and let the whites' economywhich they felt was based exclusively on their labordeteriorate and collapse.

So appealing was this alternative that the group packed up to leave even before final word on the

Page 41

land grant arrived. They rejoiced that the white settlers would now become destitute and starve while the Aloso would become independent. In this frame of mind the more than 200 tribespeople left their satellite village and went to the colony's principal city. There they squatted beside a large water hole.

Meanwhile, other tribal people living permanently near this city were more relaxed when the drought first began. Some had gardens on their employer's property and many could usually find some work around the city. Their condition was relatively good. But the Aloso, having arrived more recently, had no patron relationship with any of the settlers. Their condition was poor.

By now the head chief was busy seeking ways to assert his authority and avenge the insults the whites had inflicted on him. To complicate the situation, the missionaries who spoke the Aloso language had left the country on an extended vacation just before the tribal uprising. Since all the tribespeople were now unemployed, they had plenty of time to talk. Their tension increased as they aired all their real and imagined hurts.

Then the head chief's first message came. Independence, official help, and their own land were just around the corner. That sent a wave of excitement through the tribe. Next the chief came to confirm this in person. "Yes, we will receive official help. We will not be dependent on the white settlers anymore. The government trucks bringing our equipment are to arrive any day."

Page 42

The Hope of Independence

The head chief, confident help was really on the way, played up his role as savior of his people. One person reported hearing him address the excited populace at night: "My people, the day in which we must beg is past. Each family will have land, equipment, and plenty of food. You will prepare food and call your children to eat. When their bellies are full, you will send them out to play. Everyone will have enough. All my people will be happy and independent!"

By referring to the wonderful future ahead, the chief reminded the peopleespecially the womenthat their former status was soon to return.

This message carried great meaning for the women, whose oppressed position caused them much hidden anger. The top chief realized the women were his strongest supporters and lost no time cultivating their support.

The chief was so eager to gain the loyalty of all the people that, in his nightly talks to them, he reported what the whites were supposedly doing to those Aloso still employed. Among other things, he leaked the secret that settlers were putting "medicine" on the bread they gave their employees. Those who ate this bread would not become people of worth.

The arrival of the 200-plus rebels from the southwest brought new fuel into this charged atmosphere. The tension mounted visibly.

One day a young tribesperson stole money from a local store. The owner called the deputies. They

Page 43

caught the suspect and took him with them to the chief. Deputies, suspect, and chief sat in a Jeep in front of the colony store to wait for the white mayor's arrival. By the time he arrived, a vast crowd of excited observers, both tribespeople and whites, had gathered. When the mayor saw the excited mob, he decided to move into the courtyard of the store to question the thief.

Now the local jail was in the enclosed area as well. So when the mayor ordered the driver of the Jeep to enter the courtyard, people thought both the chief and the suspect would be jailed. Before the mayor himself could enter the courtyard, angry tribeswomen, armed with sticks, knives, and stones, swarmed into the enclosure.

When these angry women grabbed the mayor, he immediately saw how dangerous the situation was. He therefore dismissed both the suspect and the chief, saying that without the missionary interpreter there was little value in talking. He announced that he would call the chief to settle the problem later, when the interpreter could be present.

Although bloodshed was temporarily prevented, this experience raised the tribal temper to the boiling point. Other missionaries and church leaders tried to calm the tribespeople and keep them from drastic action. But the people drowned these appeals, shouting, "Our ears burn. Our ears burn." ("We are tired of your continual lying and we won't listen to your lies any longer!")

Then tragic news arrived. The promised government help would not be coming. This was a devas-

Page 44

tating blow to tribal hopes.

Finally the message was modified. The government would at least give the tribe a certain area of land for a settlement. But it would supply no food or implements. The tribespeople debated. Finally they decided to move to this land. The white settlers saw this as sheer folly. The area was far away; no one knew its exact location. There were no wells there and the drought was at its height.

A well-meaning rancher whose extensive property lay directly in the path of the proposed destination decided to personally discourage the tribe from moving. He came to tell them that, when they crossed his land, he would have to forbid their access to all waterhe needed it to keep his cattle alive. The Aloso turned violent. Only a hurried exit by Jeep saved the rancher from being dismembered on the spot. The tribespeople interpreted his action as just another attempt to block their independence.

Finally, even the water hole on the edge of town dried up. Horses were dying for want of fodder and water. There seemed to be no alternativethe tribespeople had to leave at once.

By this time the missionaries who spoke their tribal language had returned, but the Aloso refused restraint. Now numbering nearly a thousand, they moved several kilometers to another water hole. Their work animals could no longer make the proposed trek. Finally this water hole went dry too. There seemed to be no alternative but to set out on foot for the "promised land." At the missionary's

Page 45

urging, the whites provided tractors and trailers to move the tribespeople to the proposed land grant.

When they arrived they found the place sandy and unfit for agriculture. They immediately began to dig a well (with some help from the whites), for sweet water was essential for survival. Attempt after attempt failed. When the chief saw that no drinking water would be found, he left the group and spent the night in the open, alone. He spent the night appealing to the tribal ancestral spirits and praying to God to give the water that would save his people and free them from white domination.

But no water was found. To stay any longer was sheer folly. About half the group returned to the European colonies. The others, led by the chief, set out on foot for a river several hundred kilometers away.

Even though a year had passed by the time I arrived on the scene, the situation was still explosive. Tension was apparent everywhere. For this reason, the white colonists asked for a special study of the rebellion and the conditions that produced it. The data presented here are part of those findings.

Dealing with Wrongdoing

During the investigation, I also visited the area in which the lamentable episode with the relief supplies had taken place. In view of the unfortunate missionary involvement in the event, I decided it would be better to go alone. I needed to be independent even of the missionaries.

Page 46

In an effort to identify with the tribespeople, however, I reached for tribal sponsorship. I located two persons who spoke both the tribal language and the trade language. Both had relatives in the area. I explained my assignment to them and asked them to help me find a way to help their fellow tribespeople "become people."

To strengthen my dependence on them, I parked my research Jeep and let my tribal sponsors take me to the tribal village in a borrowed horse and buggy.

As we traveled along, I shared some of my personal struggles in my search for self-identity. I had come to Canada as an immigrant and received all my education in that country. I often found myself at odds with the prevailing "old country" European worldview of my older fellow immigrants who were in control. After I was ordained to the ministry of the church, I began to share some of my concerns in sermons.

For these efforts I was "rapped on the head" by the church elders. They said, "What you said was not wrong, but you are too young to say it." Or, "We don't mention such things from the pulpit in our church."

All of this increased my frustration. At first I channeled my anger against some of the men who, in my eyes, were not letting me be a person in my own right. But this produced guilt. Finally a sympathetic older man gave me wise counsel. I then recognized that if I wanted to do God's will, I would have to channel my energy against issues rather

Page 47

than people. God had a purpose for me which only I could fulfill. In obedience to God, I finally found personal first-class status.

Did the tribespeople's experience in any way parallel my struggle? Did tribespeople feel that white people were holding them down? Had the revolt caused them to feel guilt? Should the two tribesmen and I be older brothers to the rebel tribespeople? Could they perhaps suggest actions that would lead them to first-class status without the guilt caused by rebellion?

The two nationals were most responsive and cooperative. They volunteered to prepare the way for me by going first to the village alone and explaining to the tribespeople who I was and why I had come.

While the two went to the tribal village, I visited the white colonists' villages, talking with the people and gathering information from their point of view.

In the middle of the afternoon, the two sponsors took me to the tribal village. I received an overwhelming welcome. Every man, woman, and child came to shake my hand. They piled sheepskins three-deep on the ground for me. All sat down. I then said, ''My two friends, your fellow tribesmen, have already explained why I have come. What do you think I should know to help you become people?" The tribespeople opened their hearts immediately.

For the next two hours the peoplesometimes five or six talking at the same timepoured out the

Page 48

hurts and grievances the whites had inflicted on them. The two interpreters had been instructed to catch all their complaints. While the people spoke, I jotted down just enough detail to remember each complaint. During these two hours, their complaints poured forth like a river swollen by a tropical cloudburst. Then the flow slackened to an occasional word. Finally they said, "There is no more."

I was deeply moved by their accounts of suffering. I said, "The people who did these things to you are my peoplewhite people like me. My innermost being is pained to its depth. I must go aside now to think." I also needed time to think of what to do next.

Reconciliation with God

Before I was ready to take the next step, however, the people forced my hand by calling an evening meeting. I joined the group, sitting down on the sand with some of the men gathered there. Soon, however, they asked me to sit on a bench in front of the group. I then realized I was to be the speaker of the evening.

My first impulse was to refuse. Then I leaned over to my sponsor-interpreters and asked them whether I should speak and what I should say. They suggested that I repeat to this group the story of my personal struggles for self-identity. I should also tell them how I found first-class status as a child of God by doing the will of God.

So I repeated in the local trade language what I had told the two men in the buggy. They then be-

Page 49

gan to translate my words into the tribal language and to make personal applications.

When the three messages were finished, the one local Christian in the group (who had been identified to me as a backslider) got up and said, "Yes, we all want to become people like God wants us to be. But let us remember, even if we do get plows, horses, and land, we are dirty inside. We can never enjoy the blessings of God with an inner condition like that. We have spent hours telling the bad things the white people did to us, but what about all we did to them?"

When he sat down, two hours of voluntary confession followed. Person after person got up and told about his or her own wrongdoings against the settlers. The two interpreters faithfully relayed the burden of each confession to me.

When the confessions ceased, the lone Christian rose again and said, "It's only proper that we admit the bad things we did. But while we were doing them, God was watching. What about God? Nobody has yet mentioned God."

These words struck a receptive chord. The group then selected five "talking chiefs" called talkers-between-two. These were the traditional peacemakers in time of war. (Talkers-between-two from each side would meet on neutral ground, just beyond a spear-throw from each side, to make peace.) In this case, the five talkers-between-two offered prayers of repentance to God, again confessing their quest to "become people." The reconciliation with God seemed easy.

Page 50

Reconciliation Between Races

But the tribespeople's efforts to be reconciled with the whites were not as easy or successful.

The first attempt took place at the local level. I had an opportunity to share in the local white church my experience with the Aloso. I hoped this would lead to a joint meeting of nationals and whites and possibly a reconciliation on a Christian basis.

The report of my experience in the tribal village elicited a lot of tears and admissions of wrongdoing against the tribespeople by the white Christians. They declined a reconciliation meeting, however, on the ground that this was the responsibility of church and colony leaders.

A second attempt at the colony level took the following course. After the reconciliation with God in the tribal village, I was able to meet the head chief. The chief still felt bitterly disappointed and humiliated by the experience. But I came away feeling that sooner or later he would try to be reconciled at the highest settler level.

I went to the authorities of the white colony and told them I felt the chief would seek reconciliation. The white administrator readily admitted that whites had repeatedly wronged tribespeople. He conceded, after some gentle nudging, that it would be wise and Christian to apologize to them, should the tribespeople come for reconciliation. He quickly added, however, that he was sure they would never come.

Several weeks later, I had occasion to visit the

Page 51

administrator again. As I walked along the hall toward the administrator's office, I met the head chief stumbling out of the office. His eyes were filled with tears. He was so distracted he did not see me. In the office, I found the administrator standing, silently staring out of the window. When I asked, "Did it happen?" the administrator just nodded.

"Were you able to apologize, too?"

Choking back a sob, the administrator said, "It's just too hard to apologize to natives. . . ."

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. Name three major problems that arose when the foreign sugar company moved into the area and upset the local culture.

2. How might these problems have been avoided?

3. How did the white settlers help create the problems?

4. What insight and action helped diffuse the situation and bring peace?

5. How does Christian faith help build a new positive self-image?

6. What is our relationship to new immigrants from non-European cultures? Do we make them feel like second-class people as the colonists of the story did the local people?

7. How do we remain colonists in our local settings? Who are the natives to whom we can't apologize?

Page 52

Chapter 5

The Way Africans Make Peace

A fully independent church, product of decades of denominational missionary work, found itself split by a long-term conflict. It seems that after the last missionaries left, some old hidden tensions came to the surface. Some of the earliest national church leaders had come from a different area and had never been fully accepted by the local leaders. Seventy-five years later the descendants of the nonlocals were at the head of the medical and educational programs of the church. The administration of the church, however, was in the hands of local leaders.

Because of government regulations, the church was now largely cut off from foreign financial help and constantly short of funds. The medical program, on the other hand, received large grants of foreign aid. They were turning it into an internationally recognized, first-rate program. The educational program did not need foreign help, since the government fully subsidized it. This difference in

Page 53

access to resources contributed to the tensions.

At first the church leaders tried to assert their authority over all the programs. But charter limitations prevented their gaining control of the medical and educational arms of the church. The struggle eventually led to clashes between leaders of church branches.

As the struggle dragged on, more and more people took sides, causing a division in the church. The highly educated medical and educational people led one group. The generally older and often less-qualified pastors and church leaders led the other.

In addition to this major split, numerous local trouble spots caused minor rifts.

The church split led to much mutual harassment. At first this happened only internally. On the one hand, the church leaders committed a number of nasty actions. They put the leaders of the service arms of the church under a church ban. Those who refused to shun the banned persons they forbade to enter the church building. The church leaders also refused to perform marriages and burials for the excommunicated and their supporters.

On the other hand, the medical and educational branches harassed church members who did not share their views. They dismissed them from their boards, fired some they had employed, and transferred employed family members of church leaders to inconvenient places.

The church leaders insisted they were merely trying to practice principles the missionaries had

Page 54

taught them. They excommunicated the "erring," ordering other church members to shun them. However, many of the church members were employed by those banned. If the church members obeyed the ban, many would have to give up their jobs.

The church asked three things of those whom it had banned. They were to repent of their errors, confess their failures in public, and accept whatever discipline the church imposed.

In reply, the service arms of the church pointed out serious irregularities in church administration. These included mismanagement of funds, charter violations, and voting frauds. They insisted that power-hungry church leaders were the ones who needed to repent and accept discipline.

Eventually, a series of lawsuits were filed by both sides. Some of the lawsuits had already resulted in court orders. For example, the court had ordered the church to give the dissident group access to the church building for services, weddings, and funerals. It also forbade the church to exclude them from burial in the church cemetery.

After several years of uneasy standoff, both parties agreed to accept an outside mediator. In cooperation with this mediator, both sides agreed that instead of demanding individual repentance, penance, and punishment, the contending groups would repent and forgive each other.

This approach was based on the local, traditional way of reconciliation. It required that all parties concerned in a quarrel should lose an equal amount

Page 55

of face during a communal reconciliation ritual.

In working toward this goal, I as mediator tried to drain off the angry and bitter feelings. I listened to all the individuals who had grievances and wanted to speak about the problems. I made extensive notes so I could meet again with the individuals whenever their various accounts differed sharply. In this way, I was able to be a mirror, making individuals more conscious of their personal contributions to the church rift.

Out of these weeks of listening and talking came a peace package. This plan provided three things.

(1) A list of the negative contributions of the various parties.

(2) A series of actions to undo the harm done to individuals.

(3) A series of steps toward complete reconciliation and reintegration of the entire church.

The package concluded with a communal prayer of repentance, forgiveness, and reconciliation.

An equal number of representatives from the two major factions studied and modified this package until they reached a mutually agreeable statement.

After all had agreed upon and signed the agreement, I gave the group a sealed envelope with a fairly complete catalog of the "sins" committed during the conflict. They were to burn the envelope publicly when they had put into effect the last step of the reconciliation. This would symbolically erase all the wrongs and ill-will.

Page 56

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. How is a mediator able to help diffuse the anger felt by persons in conflict?

2. What practical steps can help persons or groups in conflict work at reconciliation?

3. How helpful are excommunication and shunning in situations where both sides contributed to the conflict?

Page 57

Chapter 6

How a Peacemaker Works

Peacemakers are usually called mediators or culture brokers in secular writings. Effective mediators or culture brokers often are outsiders to the group they help. In fact, they often come from entirely different cultures. They must be persons, however, who have become deeply aware of their own culture and how it affects human relationships. As a result, they can be sympathetic to cultural baggage carried by people from other cultures.

Such mediators are similar to financial agents who operate exchanges between different currencies. Culture brokers help different cultural groups find aspects within their respective cultures which they can tradeoff to resolve conflicts. Such go betweens must be impartial or neutral, They must favor neither side in a conflict.

Page 58

The Absent Broker

If the parties in conflict have adequate confidence in an outside broker, this person can often help resolve conflicts even when he or she is not present.

I have often been able to serve as an absent broker for Chingola Church. This is an indigenous church with which I have been associated over several decades.

One of the main problems in conflict situations is that the two sides are too busy stating their own case to listen to the other side's story. Encouraging the conflicting parties to meet and tape-record the story of the problem for the absent broker can often overcome this weakness of ''not hearing the other side." Only one person at a time can speak into the microphone. This means everyone present has to listen to a full account of both sides of the fight while the recording is in progress.

Quite often such a tape would end with words like: "Tiger (my local nickname), you don't have to come anymore. We are already seeing how we can resolve this conflict." By actually hearing the other side, both sides had become aware of a mutually acceptable solution.

The Broker as Source of Essential Information

In the highlands of South America, communists were recruiting among indigenous people. Local indigenous Christians were under severe pressure to join the rebel movement. Some of them, knowing I had been born in Russia, felt I should know some-

Page 59

thing about communism. They arranged that I be brought blindfolded into a secret meeting in which all the people could question me about communism. Afterward, the group debated long and seriously whether my testimony was trustworthy. The Christians carried the day, preventing serious bloodshed.

The Broker as a Two-Way Mirror

In the account of the conflict between missionaries and national church leaders described in Chapter 3, I functioned as a two-way mirror. I helped the missionaries see how their prayer letters offended local Christians. I also helped the nationals understand the dilemma of missionaries who have to raise support if they want to continue serving in a foreign country.

The Broker as Catalyst

In the Chapter 4 account of the European settler/local tribespeople conflict, I not only served to defuse a new "rebellion" in the making; I also became the catalyst or moving force that led to reconciliation with God. As a catalyst, my presence and my brief intervention brought about certain events. As soon as these events were in progress, I was no longer needed.

The Broker Using Cultural Self-Exposure

In one South American country, the missionaries were frustrated because the national church leaders refused to deal with a series of teenage pregnan-

Page 60

cies among church members. The missionaries called me to help them discover the source of the problem.

In this case, time was so short I began with an example from my own culture. I shared with a local leader the problem of heavy petting faced by North American teenage church members. Then I asked for counsel he might give my people back home. This confession of a problem in my culture opened the door to discuss the local teenage sex problem. I soon realized it was caused by the mission's scholarship program.

This society accepted trial marriage, but not promiscuity. When a boy began to sleep with a girl, her parents publicly declared him to be in trial marriage with their daughter. This put all other girls off limits to the young man as long as the trial marriage was not publicly revoked.

The mission, however, did not permit scholarship recipients to marry while receiving their scholarship. The reason, of course, was that they did not have enough money to support both students and their families.

But scholarship recipients would come home on a weekend or during vacation and have trysts with local girls. Not wanting their sons to lose their scholarships, the sons' parents prevented the girls' parents from announcing the trial marriages. This left the door wide open for scholarship recipients to sleep with a different girl every time they came home. Hence, the indigenous church felt that the mission was making all their girls pregnant.

Page 61

This problem was resolved by a simple change in scholarship regulations.

Brokers May Also Have to Lose Face

Conflict in Africa and Asia is usually resolved by an equal amount of loss of face. During one church quarrel, I was called in as mediator. I tried to drain off as much ill will as possible. For several weeks I listened to those on both sides of the conflict tell their respective stories.

Besides relieving tension, these conversations let me function as a mirror to the parties. I helped them recognize their part in causing and deepening the conflict. I hoped to establish roughly equal blame, so equal loss of face could become the basis for their reconciliation.

After the equal-loss-of-face package had been presented to both sides and a date had been set for the public reconciliation, one of the contending groups asked for a private meeting with me. In this meeting they accused me of serious failures as a Christian and of major cultural mistakes.

The censure continued for several hours. When it finished, I felt all had been lost. So I humbly said, "Many things you have said I recognize, others I do not recognize. However, if you knew me better, you would find even more weaknesses. I am sorry I have failed you. You gave me your confidence as mediator, and now I have failed you. I feel deeply responsible that we are not going to have a reconciliation."

"But we will have a reconciliation!" they all cried.

Page 62

Suddenly the light dawned on me. Because this group felt it was suffering the most loss of face, it was now causing my own loss of face. If a mediator chooses to get involved in a conflict in such a setting, why shouldn't he or she also be ready to lose an equal amount of face?

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. What role does listening play in resolving conflicts?

2. How does recording each person's complaint on tape aid the listening process?

3. Do you see self-exposure by a culture broker as a valid method of reconciliation?

4. How does one function as a mirror to a person in one's own culture?

5. Is it right to ask peacemakers to lose face? How did Jesus as a reconciler have to lose face?

Page 63

Chapter 7

When a Peacemaker Serves as a Catalyst

An ecumenical mission was deeply frustrated. After 25 years of dedicated work with the Baldio tribe, there was still no church. Sure, there were dozens of believers, but no indigenous church. They called for my help to discover why.

After a Bible study about the woman who washed Jesus' feet with her tears, I was introduced as an anthropologist to a group of these believers. I first asked if they knew what anthropologists do. One person said he had heard they dig up dead people's bones.

Some anthropologists do that, I agreed. But I told them that I was a student of cultureof the ways different people lived. I was also a Christian, I said. As such, I could identify with the woman who felt sad about the bad things she had done and who then went to Jesus for help.

Page 64

I began by telling about a failure in my own life followed by forgiveness. I then asked whether any of the local people had experienced failures that had made them sad. Had they also experienced forgiveness like the woman who came to Jesus?

First to respond was the man next to me. He asked, "What should one do if one has quarreled with one's brother-in-law and has done things to hurt him?"

Not knowing whether an actual conflict lay behind this question, I said, "Now you all know that I am a foreigner. I have just arrived here today. I have some ideas about what to do in my own culture, but I don't know what one ought to do according to your culture."

Then addressing the whole group I asked, "Friends, what should a person in your culture do if he has harmed his brother-in-law?"

Immediately several persons spoke up. He should be reconciled with his brother-in-law.

"But how can he be reconciled if his heart was full of anger, and maybe even some hatred?" I asked.

"If his heart is full of anger, he must confess it. He must confess what he has done to his brother-in-law and ask for forgiveness."

Others continued with similar advice. Little by little, I realized that I was participating in a real-life drama. This group was deeply fragmented by bitter dissensions. In fact, many of the offended and the offenders were present at the meeting.

So I turned to the man next to me and said, "My brother, it seems to me that our friends have spo-

Page 65

ken well. If one does as they have said, one can get rid of anger and find forgiveness and peace."

As soon as I finished speaking, the man next to me got up, walked across the room, and fell on his knees before another man.

He said, "Brother-in-law, I am sorry I went to denounce you before the law. Please forgive me and love me again." The two men embraced, sobbing quietly.

Then the man turned and knelt down in front of a woman and said, "Sister, I have been very mean. I am sorry." Another tearful embrace of forgiveness followed.

Soon others started moving across the room to confess misdeeds, anger, and insults to others. A whole series of problems and tensions were confessed and forgiven. As the process of reconciliation in the group unfolded, I quietly slipped away. My catalytic function had ended; I was no longer needed.

Within days the group asked the missionaries whether it would be possible for them to organize a local church.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. How might culture determine the particular form of forgiveness and reconciliation in a given area?

2. What kind of informal settings do we have for encouraging reconciliation?

3. How does tension among believers affect the health of the church?

Page 66

Chapter 8

How Ancestors Help Africans Make Peace

In one African situation, a father, employed by a colonial government, was able to open a small store in his home village. However, since he was working away from home, he put one of his unmarried daughters in charge of the business. He arranged to pay her the usual wage for this work.

For years the store functioned well. The man enlarged it time and again. Eventually, he bought his own trucks and used them to bring in trade goods and haul out local produce.

Then came independence, followed by a twenty-fold jump in inflation. However, the father never changed the wages of the daughterstill the store administrator. While he became wealthy, the daughter received her pittance. This made her increasingly unhappy with the cultural demands that she submit quietly to her father's will.

Page 67

This society also sought to maintain absolute social and material equality. Thus the increasing wealth of this colonial government employee raised many eyebrows. It caused extensive gossip. Was the old man trafficking in the souls of his neighbors? Was he a sorcerer? If not, how was he becoming so wealthy?

Both father and daughter were members of a local Protestant church, but for decades there had been no foreign missionary there. This had permitted the church to develop along local cultural lines. The daughter was an active member of the women's organization of the church.

The daughter's unhappiness with her unjust wage increased. Eventually she developed symptoms of physical illness. When "store" medicine did not help her, she took her problem to the women's society. This society held a special prayer service for her.

As the "spirit moved" in their midst, one of the women fell into a trance. She began to speak in the name of the young woman's grandmother.

"My granddaughter, you are ill because you are jealous of your wealthy father. This jealousy has settled in your back. It is now causing you too much pain.

"In addition, I, your grandmother, am very unhappy that you have never taken a husband, so I have sent this illness to you. If you want to get well, granddaughter, you must permanently leave the store. In that way, you can escape all the jealousy that is now poisoning your body. Then when

Page 68

some good man wants to marry you, you must take him as a husband.''

The daughter obeyed the message and immediately withdrew from the store. Her father accepted her retirement as valid, because it had come about through a vision from the supernatural world. Then he arranged with another daughter to manage the store, but this time at current wages. Once the first daughter was out of the store and available for marriage, a local widower asked for her hand and she accepted.

In this case, the ancestral intervention saved the father's face and restored the daughter's health. In addition, it released considerable community tension about the wealth the father had accumulated.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. What roles do past experiences play in our emotional and physical health?

2. What actions may be necessary to change situations and relationships that cause conflict?

3. How do we receive messages from God? Are visions a valid way to receive messages from God?

Page 69

Chapter 9

When the Marriage Bond is Broken

While still single, I worked in an interdenominational mission program in North America. During part of that time, I stayed with a young family with several small children. The husband was an active lay preacher in the church and operated a delivery business which took him to many rural homes.

Several times during the nearly yearlong stay, I became aware of severe tension between the husband and the wife. The wife occasionally dropped hints about birth-control concerns. The husband ignored them. As a single man, I also chose to overlook her appeals for help.

After my own marriage, my wife and I went abroad to work in missions. While there, we heard rumors that the husband of my former host family had become involved sexually with lonesome wives as he made his rural deliveries. The church, un-

Page 70

aware of these involvements, was moving toward recognizing his ministry by ordination. As the ordination day approached, the wife, who had become aware of his sexual encounters, pressured the husband to stop the ordination.

The night before the service, the husband informed the church leadership he was withdrawing due to personal problems. This sparked many rumors. Eventually the church, discovering his affairs, moved to discipline him.

He admitted indiscretions, but refused to repent publicly. Finally, the church excommunicated him as unrepentant. He continued to live with his family, but the situation was tense. To reduce the tension, the family moved out of the community into another area and began attending a church of a different denomination.

When we returned from the mission field, we became aware of the seriousness of the situation. We sensed the wife, especially, was feeling intense emotional pressures. I could not escape feeling some personal guilt, since I had earlier chosen to ignore her calls for help.

To correct my error, my wife and I visited the family several times. I admitted my feeling of having contributed to the situation. This confession, together with the earlier friendship, gave me an entrance into the home.

Over the years, the wife had given birth to one child after another in an effort to meet her husband's sexual needs. Despite all her efforts his extramarital involvements not only continued but in-

Page 71

creased. In fact, the husband put more and more pressure on his wife to violate her standards of decency to satisfy his sexual appetites.

As the pressure on the wife increased, we realized she had to get away from the situation for a while. So we invited her to our furlough home (some 120 miles away) for a week. The husband reluctantly agreed to spend two days with us the weekend he came to take his wife home.

The wife found release as she shared her burdens with us. Being away from it all helped her see her situation more clearly. She realized she was assuming too much guilt for the situation and she needed some outside help. (This eventually came in the form of support from the local pastor and his wife in her new church home.)

When the husband came on the weekend, we socialized for a while. Eventually, though, we confronted him with his unwillingness to be reconciled to God and the church. For a while it seemed he was thawing. Both my wife and I dropped to our knees to pray as we waited for the husband's decision to obey God's call.

But he continued to sit on an easy chair, talking from time to time, as he alternated between softening and hardening. We made a strong appeal to him on behalf of his seven children. That seemed to touch him.

Then, hardening totally, he said, "If my children want to become Christians, they will have to do so in spite of me. I am going to make it as hard as possible for them!"

Page 72

When we got up from our knees, we embraced the husband and assured him of our continued love and resolve to stand by as needed. Our contacts continued through the two years of our study leave from the mission field.

During the second year of our leave, a wellknown evangelist was conducting revival meetings in a giant tent near the couple's residence. The evangelist's ministry was moving thousands of people to clean up their lives. So we invited the couple to attend an evening service with us. After much hesitation, the husband agreed to go with us.

We drove 40 miles to pick up the couple and took them to the tent meeting. During the meeting, the husband was visibly moved. He was obviously debating whether to go to the altar. I volunteered to accompany him. He refused. We drove to their home largely in silence.

When we arrived, both insisted that we come in for coffee. During our conversation, the husband suddenly agreed to get right with God and his wife.

After he confessed his sins to God and asked his wife to forgive him, I asked if he felt a need to renew his marriage vows to his wife. He said he did, so I asked the couple to repeat their vows as they knelt by the sofa in their living room.

The husband then said he wanted to get right with the church which had disciplined him but felt unable to make the approach. So we drove to the pastor of the disciplining church and shared the basic outline of what had happened. We asked him to make an overture to the troubled husband.

Page 73

At first the pastor insisted that the penitent must present himself to the church in person. Then he insisted that the conference leadership rather than the local church leadership should be involved in the situation.

After a long discussion, he finally agreed to make a personal overture on behalf of the local church. We were hoping the local church would release the man from his ban. Then the family as a whole could feel free to become members in their present church home in another denomination.

Unfortunately, the conference authorities did not accept the local church's action as proper. They insisted that the penitent make a public apology. This never happened.

The story does not have a happy ending. The reconciliation lasted a number of years. Then the husband began stepping out again. Eventually the couple was divorced.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. In what ways have you served as a mediator?

2. Have you ever felt as though you failed in your attempt to reconcile others?

3. Think of a reconciliation that brought an end to hostility and separation. What difference did it make in the lives of the people involved?

4. How effectively does the church deal with marital problems today?

Page 74

Chapter 10

Making Peace with One's Own Past

Peter was a Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) volunteer working effectively in a third-world country, but he was troubled. As a teenager, he and some other young fellows had taken a stereo from a vehicle on a used-car lot. It had been a thoughtless act and had brought them no benefit. Not knowing how to resell stolen property, they threw the stereo away and tried to forget the whole thing.

Ten years later, now as an MCC volunteer, the past came back to trouble Peter, What should he do? If he told MCC, he felt he would be dismissed in disgrace. If he told his church, he felt there would be a scandal. If he told the police, he was afraid he would face criminal charges.

Finally, one night after midnight at an MCC spiritual retreat, he shared his problem with me. He

Page 75

was willing and ready to make restitution, but he just didn't know how.

Offering to be the go-between, I wrote a letter to the police in the town where the event had taken place. I asked the police department for help for a penitent who wanted to clear his conscience.

The police chief responded promptly. No, he said, there would be no criminal charges. He had spoken to the car dealership concerned and they were satisfied with the insurance settlement they had received. The insurance company did not want to press charges but would be happy to be reimbursed for the cost to their company.

I sent the police a check. The police passed it on to the insurance company. The penitent reimbursed me. "A burden from the past" rolled from Peter's shoulders. Today he is a missionary.

But it isn't always as easy to clear up the past, especially when an insurance company has been involved.

Sharon and Beth were high school seniors when they got involved with drugs. They soon found they needed a lot more money than their allowance provided, so they began to steal. In one instance they stole about $3,500 worth of audiovisual equipment from a school. Then they sold it for three hundred dollars to a fence (a place where stolen goods are sold).

Four years later, both girls decided to change their lives. Sharon knew I was a missionary on furlough and decided to confide in me. Both girls had kicked hard drugs but were still smoking pot. They

Page 76

wanted help to clear up their thefts. I helped them make a list of their stealing.

Then I began to work with the largest theft, which involved the school board. I contacted the board and told them I was representing two penitent girls. They were quitting drugs and wanted to clear up their past.

The school board informed me they had lost only the $100 deductible on their insurance policy. The insurance company had paid the rest. Would the school board name a representative to meet with the girls to receive an apology and restitution? Certainly! They named the school treasurer, a fine Christian, as their representative.

The insurance company's reaction was different. Yes, they wanted to recover their losses. They also wanted to press criminal charges. They wanted the culprits' names. Pointing out that a confession to a minister is privileged information, I encouraged the company to name a non-company representative in the community. He or she could meet with the girls to receive an apology and the restitution. The company refused. In fact, they threatened me with police action to force me to reveal the names.

The months of my furlough passed. Every two weeks or so I called the company, asking them whether they were ready to accept my offer. They kept on refusing.

Two days before my return overseas, I called once more. I informed them that if they did not cooperate now, I would set the girls free before God and let them give the amount due the company to

Page 77

charity. The next day the insurance company called the school board and accepted the board's representative to act on their behalf.

That evening I brought the two nameless girls to meet the representative. The latter received the girls' apology and a check covering all losses. Before the representative let them go, however, he prayed for them. Coming out, Sharon and Beth really whooped it up. Both said, "Wow, I'm higher than I've ever been on LSD."

This story has a tragic sequel. Sharon was a church member. I knew her conscience would demand that sooner or later she approach the church to confess what had happened. So I called a friend of the pastor. I asked him to tell the pastor one of his church members, a young woman, would probably come to him one of these days. She would confess several years of drug life and stealing to finance her habit. She would also tell of the comeback and the restitution she had made.

I hoped the pastor could keep that confession as privileged information. This would prevent the church from punishing the girl after her repentance. The pastor assured my friend he would do everything in his power to help.

The young woman did go to the pastor. He was warm and sympathetic. But eventually he felt he had to inform his church board. Before long the church excommunicated this girl who had come back from drugs and made restitution for her thefts. She never went back to that church again.

Page 78

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. Are there incidents in your past with which you would like to make peace?

2. What steps might you take to resolve the conflict?

Page 79

Chapter 11

Children Can Make Peace with Their Parents

Several years ago, I became aware that angry confrontations were developing between ten-year-old Judy and her father. Twenty years earlier, as a college professor, I had unsuccessfully tried to help Judy's father make peace with his mother. Even now, after 20 years, the young man, now a father himself, was avoiding his own mother because of his strong feelings against her.

I also knew his mother was still nursing negative feelings against her own mother, now an invalid in a retirement home. When I considered this and other situations like it, I found myself recalling what the Bible says about sin binding unto the third and fourth generation (Exodus 34:7; Numbers 14:18). Was this such an example?

In another case, a couple had a daughter who was an ideal ''good girl" all through her years at

Page 80

home. Never rebelling, she obeyed her parents dutifully. But she nursed bitter feelings against both her father and mother. Her mother ran things and her father remained aloof. She always felt her father had refused to protect her from her mother's domination. This so confused her inner lifeeven her sexual identitythat she entered a sexual relationship with another woman.

In contrast, her brother rebelled violently. He voiced his angry feelings against a father who wouldn't stand up for him and a mother who tried to control every detail of his life.

Today the son's home is a reverse image of his parents' home. His own daughter resents her mother who won't stand up for her against what she sees as a manipulating father. And she hates her father for "trying to run her life."

When my wife and I learned from our own children that we, too, had "bound" them, my wife took stock of her own life. She realized she still had some unresolved feelings against her deceased mother.

Fortunately, her discovery coincided with the arrival of the book Making Peace with Your Parents by Harold Bloomfield. Encouraged by this author, she unburdened herself at her mother's grave. She felt a burden roll off her heart. She had been "unbound." Then in her own heart she embraced her deceased mother. It seemed to her as if her mother also warmly returned the embrace, something she had never done before.

The problem of such transferred conflict is not

Page 81

limited to the home setting. Many years ago I became acquainted with a young teacher. I felt he was getting a raw deal in the closed and difficult community in which he taught. I helped him find another job. He gradually drifted into linguistics and translation, a field in which he showed considerable ability. Later, I became an adviser to a translation team in which he participated.

As we worked together, I often found myself so irritated by this young man I wanted to hit him. This was not very usual for me, so I watched the situation more carefully.

I discovered my strong feelings were triggered whenever the young man adopted a certain head position and an especially defiant tone of voice. Once I realized this, I spoke to him about it.

He then told me about an unhappy childhood with endless beatings by an authoritarian father. He recognized the stance I described and confessed he had developed it in his relationship with his father. Whenever an authority figure entered his life and threatened him, he unconsciously slipped into that stance.

He shared a long list of teachers, employers, and other authority figures with whom he had developed this trouble. Looking back, he now saw that the defiant stance he had developed with his father triggered the reactions of these people, as it had mine.

In my own life, too, an early childhood experience remained a strong force, even after I understood its origin. Every time I felt unjustly accused

Page 82

even of the most minor thingI experienced violent emotion. A counselor suggested this could be the result of something that had happened in childhood.

I questioned my mother. In tears, she told me about an incident I did not remember at all.

When I was about three years old in Russia, my mother was baking Zwieback, the double-decker buns. She left them on a baking sheet to rise. When she returned to put them in the oven, she found them all punched flat. She asked the children playing in the house who had done it. They pointed at me.

I strongly denied it. This made the "crime" doubly serious in my mother's eyes. So she whipped me until I admitted doing it. Several hours later, she learned another child had actually done it.

After these many years, Mother and I were able to make peace about it. Although the strength of my reaction against false accusations has diminished a little, I still have not been able to eliminate the knee-jerk reaction entirely.

There is a ray of hope, however. "Bound" children can take the initiative and unbind themselves and their parentseven if the latter have died. My wife's personal testimony cited earlier bears witness to this truth. You can make peace with your parents.

Harold Bloomfield illustrates how a child can effectively take the first step in making peace with his or her parents. Bloomfield was in the middle of a major promotional campaign for one of his books

Page 83

when he was called to the telephone. His mother sobbed out the following message to him: "Dad underwent surgery! Cancer of the pancreas. Three months to live. You've gotta come home!"

Until this call, Bloomfield felt he had been handling the relationship with his parents rather well. Although he lived 3,000 miles away, he made occasional stops for lunch or dinner in a restaurant and occasional phone calls on special occasions. When he was with his parents he always kept a tight lid on his conflicting feelings toward them. Thus he managed to keep alive for himself the fiction that he was part of a caring family.

The phone call forced him to face reality. All his life he had felt sorry for his dad, who constantly complained about raw deals he got at work or in business. When his parents were together they usually either argued or kept up a hostile silence. As a teenager his constant prayer had been, "God, help me survive until I'm old enough to get out of this mess."

Now on the plane, en route to his parents' home, a truth suddenly dawned on him. It would be impossible for him "to go to heaven alone." Either he succeeded in taking his family with him, or he wouldn't go either.

"This visit," he said to himself, "will be different. I'm supposed to be a psychiatrist, a soul doctor. Let's see whether I've really learned something."

At his father's bedside, he took the initiative. "Dad, I really feel deeply about what's happening to you. I confess that in the past I've kept my dis-

Page 84

tance. Now I want you to know and feel how much I love you."

Then he leaned over and embraced his father, who was propped up in his hospital bed. Immediately he could feel his father tensing.

Instead of reacting as usualby withdrawingBloomfield continued gently. "C'mon, Dad. I really want to hug you! I also want you to hug me! Now put your arms around me!"

Inside, Bloomfield felt himself recoiling as he felt his father's continuing rigidity. A voice whispered, "You don't need to put yourself through this. He doesn't care for you. Pull back, it's his fault."

Instead, Bloomfield persisted. "C'mon, Dad. Put your arms all the way around me. Now squeeze a little!"

Bloomfield reports it took 200 such hugs until his dad could squeeze him spontaneously and then call out with deep emotion, "Son, I love you!"

Yes, no matter what stage in your life you feel the need to make peace with your parents, you can make the first move. You can establish peace!

Questions for Discussion and Reflection

1. How might the sins of your ancestors be affecting you?

2. Are you a "bound" child?

3. What initiatives might you take to "unbind" yourself?

Page 85

Chapter 12

Parents Can Make Peace with Their Children

If parents recognize a problem between them and their children and open themselves to God's grace, they too can initiate reconciliation.

The Runaway Daughter

During the height of the teenage drug craze, when the Jesus movement was strong in North America, my wife and I related to a Christian family whose youngest daughter was into drugs. Through our own teenage children, we had been able to establish a tenuous link with the girl.

One day the girl disappeared. The parents were understandably frantic. But they piously hid their desperation from their friends, especially their church.

Finally they consulted us about their dilemma. Should they call the police and report the girl

Page 86

missing? We cautioned against it and instead agreed to the parents' request to help find the girl.

Finding her was relatively easy. Through our contacts with drug-involved Jesus people, we obtained the telephone numbers of a cross-country chain of "safe" houses. Then using the missing girl's "handle" (a new first name by which drug users identified themselves to their group), we made three phone calls and located her in a large urban center.

Since I was making a trip into that part of the country, I arranged my travel via that city. I called the "safe" house from the airport and left a message for the girl: I would return three days later and drop in to see her if she was still there. (I did this to give her the choice of running if she preferred not to make contact with me.)

Three days later I arrived at the "safe" house and began to "rap" with the young people there. They were interested in how drugs were used by medicine men in third-world countries. What did those people see during their drug highs? Gradually I shifted the topic to the power of God's Spirit in the lives of converted medicine men. Then I moved to my own quest to hear the voice of God's Spirit better and thus experience God's power in my life to a fuller degree.

Dozens of drug users, some smoking pot, crowded around. Eagerly they asked how they could experience God's power in their own lives. The conversation went on from early afternoon until about three o'clock the next morning.

Page 87

The girl I had come to see was there, but she remained in the background. During the initial introductions, I had greeted her just like everybody else. I had given no indication of familiarity with, or interest, in her. But because she had not run away, I felt she was interested in seeing me.

But when more than 12 hours passed and she still had made no effort to talk to me, I began to wonder. Finally, somewhat disappointed, I lay down on a pad assigned to me. I was just drifting off to sleep when I realized the girl was kneeling beside my mat.

"Why are you looking for me? What do you want from me?" she wanted to know.

I told her I had come to make an offer. "I offer you a chance to leave home openly, to reduce some of the pressure on your parents, whom I consider my friends. I am offering you a return ticket home and back here. Meet your parents, tell them that you are leaving, and I will take you back to the airport to return here." She agreed to consider this.

Two hours later it was time to leave for the airport. To my surprise, the girl was at the door ready to go, her few belongings hanging over her shoulder in a black garbage bag. When I handed her the return ticket, however, she became agitated. I asked whether I should notify her parents of the plane's arrival time so she might not have to leave the airport at all. She could return after talking to them at the airport. I promised to stay with her to make sure she would not be kept against her will. This seemed to reassure her.

Page 88

When the plane arrived, her father was there to meet her. Without hesitation, and without reproof, he took her into his arms and held her tightly for a long time. I then explained the arrangement. She was here only briefly and was going to return to where she had been. Her father made a counter-offer.

"Come home and see your mother. Then you can leave. But if you choose to stay here, I'll finance you in your own apartment. I may not approve of your lifestyle, but you're still my daughter and I still love you. You don't have to live in the gutter, even if you choose a lifestyle I disapprove of."

Eventually the girl accepted the offer. She relocated in her own apartment in a large city near her parents' home. Her parents provided a no-strings-attached allowance. For two years they expressed their love whenever they went to see her. Then they went home weeping bitterly over what they had seen. But the girl did clean up her life. She met a fine Christian fellow whom her family deeply liked.

These parents had successfully made peace with a runaway daughter.

The Rebellious Daughter

Less dramatic, but equally traumatic for the parents, was the experience of a fine Christian couple with three model children. Both parents were teachers; their children seemed to thrive whether their parents were teaching in North America or abroadwhere they spent at least a decade. The

Page 89

children all became active members of the church and seemed to function well in an obviously warm, loving home.

During her final years at the university, however, one of the daughters began to question many inherited values. Her parents encouraged her questions and tried to candidly share their faith and their problems.

One day the daughter announced she was contemplating a live-in arrangement with a fellow graduate student. The parents swallowed hard. They heard the daughter out and gently noted where such an arrangement might lead. They pointed out that live-in breakups can be as painful as divorces.

The daughter brushed aside all objections. ''If I want to learn the 'hard way,' as you call it, what's to stop me?"

The parents swallowed even harder. Then they assured the daughter, "Whether you choose the easy or hard way, we want you to know that we'll continue to love and to trust you." The daughter left.

The couple then called us to discuss their dilemma. "Have we done right?"

We tried to share their agony. We assured them the supreme act of love is to love even when one's values, ideals, and love are rejected.

Somewhat reassured, the parents voiced an even deeper concern. "If she does go into a live-in arrangement, what do we do when she comes home? Do we invite her partner? If they stay overnight,

Page 90

do we allow them to share one bedroom?" They soon realized they would have to pay that price, too.

During the next four years, the parents continued to love and accept their daughter. Then one day she announced, "I'm coming home to you and to God. Thanks for being there for me whenever I needed you."

These parents had not only made peace, they had not allowed the "bond of peace" to be broken. They had preserved peace.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

1. Reflect upon your relationship with your parents. List their good qualities and the things you appreciate about them.

2. Write out the things you wish were different in your relationship with them.

3. Set a time to talk with your parents about your relationship.

4. If you have children, repeat the four steps above in relation to them.

Page 91

Bibliography

Recommended Additional Reading

Bloomfield, Harold H. Making Peace with Your Parents. New York: Random House, 1983.

Gibbs, Jr., James L. "The Kpelle Moot," in Paul Bohannon, ed., Law and Welfare. Garden City: Natural History Press, 1967; pp. 277290. (An African palaver to resolve conflict.)

Hiebert, Paul G. Konduru: Structure and Integration in a South Indian Village. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1971. (Especially chapters 46 on panchayat reconciliation in India.)

Kraybill, Ronald S. Repairing the Breach. Scottdale: Herald Press, 1980.

Krebs, Richard L. Creative Conflict. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982.

Lieberman, Mendal and Marion Hardie. Resolving Family Conflict: Everybody Wins. Santa Cruz, California: Unit Press, 1981.

Page 92

The Author

I. M. Friedmann was born in 1922 in the Soviet Union, where he learned German as his first language. His parents migrated to Canada when he was seven, so he received his elementary and secondary education in Canada.

After receiving a diploma from Elim Bible Institute in British Columbia (1943), he received a B.A. in humanities from Tabor College (1947), an M.A. in anthropology (1952), and a Ph.D. in linguistics (1958), both from the University of Washington.

He began his mission experience with the Mennonite Brethren in Colombia and Panama, where he helped reduce to writing some 10 dialects of the Choco language family (194757). He also taught anthropology and modern languages at the University of Washington (195153; 195758) and at Tabor College (195863).

He served as a culture broker part-time with the Choco Church program in Panama (19591984). He served as a translation consultant with United Bible

Page 93

Societies, training mother-tongue speakers of third-world languages as Bible translators. His work with the Bible Societies included responsibility for all of South America, and later for blocks of countries in East and West Africa (19631984).

His numerous writings have focused on anthropological research, usually on cross-cultural communication. He has been a frequent contributor to Practical Anthropology, Missiology, and The Bible Translator.

Since 1984 he is semiretired, devoting himself to research, writing, and peacemaking assignments. The church among the Choco Indians has been one of his long-range interests.

Table of Contents

cover

page_3

page_4

page_5

page_7

page_8

page_9

page_10

page_11

page_12

page_13

page_14

page_15

page_16

page_17

page_18

page_19

page_20

page_21

page_22

page_23

page_24

page_25

page_26

page_27

page_28

page_29

page_30

page_31

page_32

page_33

page_34

page_35

page_36

page_37

page_38

page_39

page_40

page_41

page_42

page_43

page_44

page_45

page_46

page_47

page_48

page_49

page_50

page_51

page_52

page_53

page_54

page_55

page_56

page_57

page_58

page_59

page_60

page_61

page_62

page_63

page_64

page_65

page_66

page_67

page_68

page_69

page_70

page_71

page_72

page_73

page_74

page_75

page_76

page_77

page_78

page_79

page_80

page_81

page_82

page_83

page_84

page_85

page_86

page_87

page_88

page_89

page_90

page_91

page_92

page_93