Activating Change Through Reconciliation
October 17, 2007
Jolene Hildebrand
Jolene Hildebrand
What do we mean when we say “reconciliation”? It’s a word often used by individuals and institutions to align their actions with a higher moral meaning. The philosophy of reconciliation motivates political truth commissions and is used powerfully in the church as well as on a personal level in connection to other people. It generally refers to any movement that has recognized the need to address and reform wrongs from the past in order to offer healing and move towards restitution.
Reconciliation also has strong religious connotations; it’s particularly associated with the act of confession, which is considered to be a healing sacrament by the Catholic Church. According to an article published recently in The Wall Street Journal, the rite of confession is making a comeback in both Catholic and Protestant circles. Why? Chiefly because people desire absolution and healing in a world that often rejects guilt as a weakness.
In this way, reconciliation is a word that recognizes the need to admit an issue, confess the problem and move towards a resolution. When we look at our own university, how do we approach our desire for change with an attitude that acknowledges our own blame for the problems we continually encounter?
One thing to learn is that time does not heal wounds. We cannot believe that things inevitably improve. When looking back into the archives of Mars’ Hill, I realized that the same issues were being addressed almost every year. In the attempt to force some sort of change, we provoked every issue from community standards to sexuality, hoping to catch the attention of the school administration. Ironically, this same call to change is repeated every year, and seems to have resulted in our paralysis as a student body. If battle tactics don’t accomplish a solution, then what will?
This perpetual recycling of conflicts reveals that something is not working. Each party remains convinced that they know better; yet fail to persuade the other. How can we change this never-ending cycle of strife? Both sides need to accept their guilt and actively engage in dialogue.
For a student, reactionary thinking is natural; yet being the one to initiate a process of reconciliation shows a willingness to pursue dialogue that can cause change. If we remain stubborn by thinking that things are constantly in need of improvement, we miss some good reasons for why things exist the way they are in the first place. And conversely, it’s simplistic to believe that change is unnecessary and only corrupts a worthy institution.
Desire for change needs to be engaged on a personal level. Individuals must take responsibility for the problems created by the establishment they represent. We need to not only admit the issues that we are constantly running into, but investigate the sources of contention - including the seemingly unresolvable issues of worldview.
As students, apathy and discontent cannot be our response to the frustrations we have with this school and administration. But recirculating the same issues does not challenge our own notions of righteous indignation. To advocate change, a desire for reconciliation can provide us with the means to dialogue with our whole university and move forward from recurrent problems.
Now you go...
Got something to say?