3.1 Understanding the term “conflict”
3.2.2 Conflict Theory and Interactional Symbolism Theory
Conflict Theory challenges the idea that the society can be without conflict. Conflict theorists believe that societies are usually in a state of conflict; harmony is rare because competition and struggle between groups for power and wealth are the normal situation in any human society. They do not support the idea that society solves its problems automatically, as functionalists and the allies of equilibrium theory believe. Conflict theorists observe that there is injustice in societies. They argue that there are very few
47
social patterns that exist because they are in everybody’s interest. To them, whenever a group gains, a different group is likely to lose. Hence, one’s getting ahead will always be at the expense of another (Spencer 1985:16-17, 200). Hanson and Oakaman concur, and hold the view that a conflict approach seeks for solutions for a society in conflict. They argue that a conflict approach attends to tensions between social factions, institutions and subcultures that are the product of power relations in which one group seeks to dominate, control manipulate or subdue the others for its own advantage. According to their argument, the approach seeks to understand who benefits from the social structures and how the conflict can be managed (Hanson and Oakaman 1998:9).
However, adherents to Conflict Theory do not necessarily consider conflict to be negative. Some of them, such as George Simmel, believe that conflict can be positive because it may serve as means of uniting people within a group, even while it is a negative force dividing that group from other groups. This happens particularly when a group of people or individuals form an alliance for working together against another group or individual(s). Thus, even if they were in conflict before, they can become united and friends because of sharing the same goal of fighting the same ‘enemy’ (Spencer 1985). Friedkin criticizes those models, saying that they lack a systematic analysis of the mechanism of the interaction process. He then suggests that in order to understand how conflicts are solved, there is need for a clear and convincing analysis of the interactional process that occurs in terms of the issue which provokes the conflict (Friedkin 1998:19).
The brief analysis of these theories has found the Conflict Theory of Simmel and others the most helpful point. However the elements of determinism and reductionism need to be challenged from the biblical point of view. Otherwise it would always be the most powerful who wins in situations of conflict. The cross and resurrection at the heart of the Christian Gospel, and the teachings of Jesus and the role of women in John’s Gospel suggest limitations to this simple determinism. It is then important to briefly discuss a biblical approach to conflict resolution which is based on the Christian teachings.
48 3.3 A biblical approach to conflict resolution
A biblical approach to reconciliation then critiques social determinism on the basis of biblical revelation According to Stassen the biblical approach claims to address the conflict from its root, basing its strategies on Jesus’ teachings (Stassen 1992:33-34). The way of addressing the knot of the problem then is the only way to achieve true reconciliation. “Conflict is not peripheral to the reconciliation process but its very heart.
If the sources of conflict are not named, examined, and taken away, reconciliation will not come about (Schreiter 1992:23). Sphar argues that the biblical approach to reconciliation is effective when it is used as a metaphor for salvation, as some people picture the term referring to what God has done for humankind through the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. Sphar and Simith think that the salvation act uncovers God’s work in tearing down walls between people and God, each other and even themselves (Sphar and Simith 2003:2). Their argument seems to convey the message that if one approaches the work of reconciliation from that background of recalling his/her own conflict which was removed by Jesus’ work of atonement, s/he may succeed, as it would be easier to forgive and repent from his/ her own contribution to the conflict.
If Sphar and Simith s argument is true - that the biblical approach to reconciliation emphasizes and promotes forgiveness from the victims and repentance from the perpetrators of violence - this approach would fill the gap left by the above theories.
Stassen goes further to describe the concrete steps of the biblical approach for conflict resolution embodied in what he called the general rule of reconciliation, which is the love of the enemy. This includes talking to the brother or sister with the intention of seeking to be reconciled, go two miles; love your enemies, pray for them; judge not, but forgive etc.
(Stassen 1992:53). Schreiter believes that human forgiveness, which is central to the loving of the enemy, is about not being controlled by the past. “It is the possibility of having a future different from the one that appears to be dictated by past wrongdoing”
(Schreiter 1992:58). One may then argue that Stassen’s suggested steps do not just happen naturally; they may require a kind of supernatural intervention, because what Stassen identifies as the love of the enemy and Schreiter’s observations are not a natural characteristic of human nature.
49
But the arguments of both Stassen and Schreiter can be illustrated by Immaculée Ilibagiza’s forgiveness. Ilibagiza is a survivor of the Rwandan genocide who describes how she managed to forgive the killers of her family and those who tortured her with all kinds of words and attitudes. She claims that because of her personal encounter with a Supreme Being, she was able to overcome the past and forgive her enemies (Ilibagiza 2005:91). 18
In terms of this perspective, the present study opts to adopt a model for conflict resolution, which allows the recognition of the conflict in the community
It appears that for her, it was because of divine power that she was able to forgive, from a loving heart, a killer who looted her father’s house and even tried to kill her. This illustration of love of the enemy portrays the biblical principles which help in overcoming the depths of pain and the causes of conflict in order to reconcile with the enemy.
19
18 Ilibagiza gives the details of how she struggled to forgive when she met the murderer of her family. “It was past noon and I’d been praying the rosary since dawn for God to give His love and forgiveness to all the sinners in the world. But try as I might, I couldn’t bring myself to pray for the killers. That was a problem for me because I knew God expected us to pray for everyone…” (Ilibagiza 2005:91). She continues reporting how the authorities were furious with her actions and bombarded her with questions concerning her foolishness of forgiving the one who erased her family. She sums up her answer to those questions by saying: “Forgiveness is what I have to offer” (Ilibagiza 2005:204).
19 This is facilitated by the theory of conflict grounded in sociology: Conflict Theory as discussed above.
This theory is identified as contextual as it deals with the conflict in the community.
that is, which is contextual, and which uses the biblical principles to deal with that conflict. This synthetic theory is identified by this study as a contextual biblical approach to conflict resolution. I found that this approach offers the dynamic perspective where things can change and allow even those considered as weak and neglected- such as women- to participate in the building of peace. In this view, after the study of the contexts, both the Rwandan and the Mediterranean contexts, we will interact with the biblical texts, focusing on some female characters who dealt with cases of conflict in their various contexts. It is expected that the analysis of the peacemaking role of women from the gospel, guided by the biblical principles will provide inspiration for Rwandan women in resolving conflicts as well. But before engaging in the biblical analysis, it is necessary to
50
understand and briefly discuss some of the key concepts in this work, starting with reconciliation.