“Reconciliation”
Genesis 33:1-17
Daniel J. Ott
Does anyone really want reconciliation today? Do we want to be reconciled? Several scenes from this week made me wonder.
The debt ceiling debate drove me nuts. Teri had to tell me to put down my mobile devices, I was so obsessed with the stupid thing. I’ve been disaffected with American politics for sometime, but even I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. First there were seemingly fruitful bipartisan talks: Simpson-Bowles and then the ‘gang of six.’ Then Coburn walked out on the gang. And then he was back. And then the president started having his talks. Those seemed to be making progress. Then Cantor waived the Tea Party flag and those talks came to halt. Then Boehner and the president were going to work things out. One had a press conference, the other walked out. Then the House was going to solve everything. The vote was scheduled… and then delayed. New deals were made. The House passed it the Senate rejected it. The Senate had their plan, even though everybody knew it wouldn’t fly. McConnell swooped in and met with the president, a deal was struck, and finally… finally on Tuesday, they passed a law that would raise the debt ceiling in the short run and lower the overall deficit in the long run.
This was a completely aggravating drama to watch, but what perhaps infuriated me the most were the headlines that I awoke to on Tuesday morning. “Who won?,” they asked. But they didn’t mean, “Who won?” as in “Did retirees win or lose?” or “Did the economy win or lose?” or “Did poor people win or lose?” or “Did entitlements or defense budgets win or lose?” They were asking, “Did Boehner lose power or gain power on the Hill?” “Was this a small loss for Obama that he could turn into a larger win when it comes election time?” “Was Mitch McConnell now the most powerful man in Washington?” “Was this a victory or a defeat for the Tea Party?’ No wonder the process was so aggravating. Our leaders are playing a zero sum game that at best reflects their own narrow ideological interests and at worst has only to do with reelection. Where are the leaders ready to humble themselves and make compromises with the best interests of our nation and our planet in mind? When will we elect some folks who are ready to put party politics a side and seek justice and reconciliation?
On a more personal level and perhaps more tragic, I witnessed a family in deep need of reconciliation when I took Isaac to his swimming lesson this week. I guess you could call them a family. They were at least all related to this cute little boy who has the brightest eyes and a Mohawk for his summer cut. Most of the parents retreat to the air-conditioned lobby during the lessons. I like to stay in the pool area so that I can root Isaac on a little. This night it was me and this family left by the pool. Dad sat at one end of the bench. Mom and Grand-mom sat at the other, me in the middle. Mom and Dad spent most of their time trying to make sure that their gazes never met. Grand-mom tried to keep the focus on the boy. The tension was palpable. At one point the Dad got up to go to the poolside and happened to walk past Mom. I thought her head might pop off she got so tense. They were leaving as we were. Mom and Grand-mom gave the boy a hug and a kiss while Dad very purposefully stood ten feet away gazing in the other direction. Eventually, the boy came up behind Dad and grabbed his hand and they walked quietly to his truck. My heart broke for them. I wished I was like Jesus. I wished I could tell them everything they’d ever done. I wished I could tell them that there was hope, that we can be reconciled.
One final scene made me wonder about the possibility of reconciliation: Tanks rolling through the streets of Hama, Syria. The news was that all telecommunications had been cut off along with electricity and water supplies. President Assad’s troops pushed into what had become the center of a non-violent protest for change in Syria. Snipers took to the rooftops, initially shooting at whatever moved, according to reports. News was also trickling out that Assad’s troops were carrying out executions in the streets. We’re hearing that at least 200 have been killed this week and around 2000 since the uprising began in June. We can only hope that these numbers won’t climb to the proportions of the massacre of 1982 when President Assad’s father gave the orders and his uncle conducted a scorched-earth campaign that killed as many as 40,000. The events have certainly reminded us of an ongoing history of violence and tyranny in Syria. There are no sings of any immanent reconciliation.
We do get glimmers of hope for reconciliation from time to time. One of these was the work of Bishop Desmond Tutu and his colleagues who led the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa after the fall of Apartheid. When the structures of racial supremacy that enforced a system of segregation and caste finally came down and black leaders took charge of the government, nobody was exactly sure what would happen. But soon those leaders showed that it was their intention to restore civility and community in South Africa and they would do so by actively seeking reconciliation. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission provided a forum for victims of civil and human rights atrocities to give voice to their suffering and even provided for perpetrators to receive amnesty under certain conditions, which included the public acknowledgement of their wrong.
Bishop Tutu was and is a man of peace and wisdom and a great model for reconciliation in our time. This week, I reviewed an article that he wrote wherein he talks about the necessary steps in true reconciliation. First, there needs to be a desire for reconciliation. Reconciliation is of course a two-way street. If either party is not willing to seek reconciliation, then there can be no reconciliation. Both parties have to humble themselves, face their fears and come together.
The first formal step in the reconciliation process, then, is confession. This of course is not easy. Most of us have a hard time admitting our wrongs. We want to justify ourselves and so we try to convince ourselves and others that we are right – that we have done no wrong. But if we want reconciliation, confession is necessary. Tutu uses the example of a marital dispute. He asks us to imagine a husband and wife who have quarreled. The quarrel comes to an end, but there is no admission of any wrong. They have not discussed the cause of their rift. The husband brings home a bunch of flowers “and the couple pretend all is in order.” Tutu insists that “they will be in for a rude shock. They have not dealt with their immediate past adequately. They have glossed over their differences, for they have failed to stare truth in the face for fear of a possible bruising confrontation.” “Forgiving and being reconciled are not about pretending that things are other than they are. It is not patting one another on the back and turning a blind eye to the wrong. True reconciliation exposes the awfulness, the abuse, the pain, the degradation, the truth.”[1]
Once this truth is acknowledge than there is the chance for forgiveness. Forgiveness is not easy and it is not a mere sentiment. Nor does forgiveness condone or forget the offense. Forgiveness “means taking what happened seriously and not minimizing it; drawing out the sting in the memory that threatens to poison our entire existence. It involves trying to understand the perpetrators and to have empathy…”[2] “Forgiving [also] means abandoning your right to pay back the perpetrator in his own coin, but it is a loss that liberates the victim.” Tutu uses the example of three ex-servicemen standing at the Vietnam Memorial in DC. “One asks, “Have you forgiven those who held you prisoner of war?” “I will never forgive them,” replies the other. His mate says, “Then it seems they still have you in prison, don’t they.”[3] “True forgiveness deals with the past… to make the future possible.” If we live in the past and allow grudges and resentments to poison our relationships then we will never have reconciliation and we will never have peace in the present or in the future.
The final stage of reconciliation is reparation. We cannot merely apologize and move on if injustice persists. Tutu cites the ongoing economic disparity between blacks and whites in South Africa as a continuing challenge for the reconciliation process. In as much as these disparities were caused my Apartheid they must be addressed as part of reconciliation. In as much as we can address any lasting damage that has been done, reconciliation demands that we do make reparation. This is not a condition for forgiveness, but it is a necessary final step in reconciliation.
Well, how did old Jacob and Esau do in their effort to be reconciled? First, they do both show humility and seek reconciliation. Jacob’s humility is rather formal. He and his retinue make a procession and pass before Esau bowing as one would before a prince. Jacob refers to himself as Eau’s servant and addresses him as “My Lord.” Esau, on the other hand, is much more emotional and follows his gut, as we might expect. He runs to his brother, embraces him, hugs his neck and weeps. Both brothers show their readiness to begin the reconciliation process.
So, next comes the confession right? Jacob has quite a bit to confess. He needs to tell his brother that he was wrong to take advantage of him and barter with him for his birthright. He needs to confess to his brother that he stole his blessing. Perhaps he could tell his brother about his seemingly insatiable desire to be on top at just about any cost. But, do we get such a confession? Do we get any admission by Jacob of any wrong? No. Jacob has already moved straight to the reparations. Like a husband trying to smooth things over with gifts, Jacob has sent ahead cattle and servants.
Esau does not want to receive these gifts. Amazingly, he seems ready to forgive without either confession or reparation. But Jacob insists, “Pray take my blessing that has been brought you, for God has favored me and I have everything.” “And he pressed him, and he took it.”
As further evidence of his forgiveness, Esau invites Jacob to journey with him. Really, Esau is not only inviting Jacob to travel with him, but he is inviting him to be reconciled. He’s inviting him to reunite their two households. He’s inviting him to be his brother again and live with him. But Jacob demurs and even adds one last deceit. He tells his brother that he will come to him at Seir, which is Esau’s new home and the future home of the Edomites. But Jacob has no such intention of joining his brother at Seir. When he parts with his brother, he heads in exactly the opposite direction to Shechem, in Canaan. And this passage, thereby, establishes the everlasting division between the Edomites, the people of Esau and the Israelites, the people of Jacob. This is a story of two brothers divided, of two nations divided, and a story of a reconciliation that never was.
Merciful God, although Christ is among us as our peace, we are a people divided against ourselves as we cling to the values of a broken world. The fears and jealousies that we harbor set brother against brother, neighbor against neighbor and nation against nation. Lord, have mercy upon us; heal and forgive us. Amen.
[1] Desmond Tutu, “No Future without Forgiveness,” in Approaches to Peace: A Reader in Peace Studies, David P. Barash, ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), p. 278.
[2] Ibid., pp. 278-279.
[3] Ibid., p. 279.
Dan
Teri
Leave a Reply