Commitment to People and Principles

Introduction

Few of us remember learning to walk, but if we watch a child who is learning to walk, we notice that one of the tricks to walking is learning to balance. Toddlers will throw their hands up into the air trying to discover balance. Do you remember learning to ride a bicycle? Learning to find your balance as you pedaled, coasted, and turned was perhaps the hardest part of learning to ride a bike. Watch a person on the high wire and you will notice that balance is essential to performing. Balance is vital to much of life—from riding a bike to walking to a checkbook.

There are two aspects to community which must be balanced in order for the community to exist. The first aspect is principles. Principles are the ideals that Christians share in common. These principles distinguish the church from any other group meeting. We can’t list all the principles and we may even disagree over every principle, but overall these principles would include faith in God, acceptance of Jesus as Lord and Savior, the indwelling of the Spirit, and a commitment to good works. Principles allow us to unite. Without principles there would be no church which Jesus established.

The second aspect is people. People are important to any group. A church doesn’t exist as a structure. Church buildings exist so that people can gather and share a spiritual commitment. The church is a community of believers whose lives are intertwined. We love each other. We see ourselves as a spiritual family. We share struggles and we confess and we pool resources; we share faith. Without people there would be no reason for the church which Jesus established to exist.

Principles and people live in tension with each other. Both are necessary to the existence of Christ’s church, but each one pulls in a different direction. Principles insist on agreement and similarity in thinking. People insist on diversity, individuality, and variation. Principles demand that we think. People demand that we feel. Principles have to do with our relationship with God. People have to do with our relationship with each other. Principles are the stuff of philosophy. People are the stuff of psychology. Finding the balance between these two aspects is difficult.

When we lean one way or the other, God’s church begins to look different from the divine intent. Those concerned primarily with principles will work to ensure that their beliefs are advanced even if it means that people are hurt in the process. Those committed to people will sacrifice principles to preserve relationships. Even those who value both struggle to maintain a cohesive balance between the two so that neither people nor principles are sacrificed. When conflict arises, our view of these two principles will come to the forefront. Conflict is inevitable. How we handle conflict matters. Tonight we begin looking at how to handle conflict.

People and Principles

How you handle conflict says something about how you view people and principles. None of us value these two commitments equally. Not every situation calls for balance, nor do we respond the same way in each situation. However, we do have a preference for how we respond to conflict. The way we respond to conflict isn’t necessarily right or wrong, but ways to respond to conflict may be more beneficial for the group than other ways. We are going to look at some different ways to handle conflict and you decide which style best describes you. This is not an opportunity for you to see other people and their style of dealing with conflict. This is an opportunity for you to see yourself and then to learn how to have a greater balance between people and principles.

The first way to deal with conflict is avoidance. This occurs when we lack commitment to either principles or people. Because we are afraid of conflict or erroneously believe that conflict shouldn’t happen, we seek out peace by refusing to engage in conflict. At the first sign of discord we pull back. Avoidance of conflict either results in cold silence or we leave looking for the “greener grass.” The message is clear: avoidance of conflict means that we do not care enough about the principles or the people to get involved for resolution. True—not every conflict demands participation. There are times to avoid conflict. But there are some principles which all Christians should be willing to fight for, and there should be some folks in our lives that we are willing to fight for as well. Avoidance of conflict at all cost is not a sign of our love for peace; it is only an indication of our lack of love for anything else except our comfort.

The second way to deal with conflict is compromise. Compromise suggests a willingness to negotiate and if necessary to make sacrifices. There is a moderate commitment to both people and principles. The compromiser is willing to sacrifice a little of both in order to save the bulk of both. This is the political style of dealing with conflict. Forget the rhetoric we might hear; the truth is that Democrat and Republican alike will compromise in order to bring resolution. There are times that compromise is needed, and many times that it is beneficial for the body. Compromise is not a bad thing. But there are times that compromise is not an appropriate solution to conflict. Certain principles cannot be compromised. However, most church splits have little to do with non-negotiable principles. Most conflicts which arise in a congregational setting would be served well through compromise. This is what was done in Acts 15 with the Jew/Gentile controversy.

The third style of dealing with conflict is competition. This is an imbalanced commitment to principle over people. When conflict arises this person defends the “principle of the thing” without regard to the feelings and ideas of others. Competition is about power. The size of the issue doesn’t matter. Conflict is seen as a threat to the status quo, and so authority and threats are used to keep things as they are. Again there are principles which must be fought for; however, not every issue is about die hard principles. There are disputable matters (Romans 14), and such matters do not require or need a competitive style in dealing with conflict. Such a conflict style is needed for discussing Jesus as Lord and Savior, but it is not needed for dealing with conflict over where the announcements are going to take place in the assembly.

The fourth style is compliance. Opposite of the competitor, the compliant person has an imbalanced commitment to people over principle. Relationships are preserved at almost any cost rather than principles. Conflict is far more evil than letting go of a principle. Disagreements are downplayed and glossed over. A false sense of harmony is maintained by complying with the wishes of dissenters. The real conviction is that people matter more than principles, and therefore whatever keeps people together is more important. Truth is sacrificed for tranquility. These four conflict styles are out of balance. But there is another conflict style which brings people and principles into greater balance.

Care in Confronting

The last style of dealing with conflict is committed to both principles and people. Neither can be sacrificed to resolve conflict. David Augsburger calls this style “carefronting.” Resolution is not solved by compromise, nor is resolution a battle to be won or lost. Instead resolution is a process in which God’s people and God’s principles are brought together to test and validate each other. This style of resolution combines love and power. Goals and relationships are equally important. There is a call for people to submit to God’s principles as seen in God’s word. It is a call to discipleship and the cross. But such a call is done with humility, kindness, and gentleness. This style of resolution recognizes that God can work through other people, that God’s truth is not held within one person but that others can also have a grasp of God’s truth, and at the very least that others love God with the same intensity as I.

This style of conflict resolution is seen in our text. Paul tells Timothy to pursue the principles of righteousness, love, faith, and peace, but he also tells him to not get caught up in stupid arguments. Quarreling which divides is to be avoided. Instead, when principles are questioned, there must be gentle instruction. This gentle instruction hopefully will lead to repentance and a greater appreciation for principles. Paul is encouraging Timothy to hold to both principles and people with the same intensity. It is a balance that is difficult to maintain.

Which style defines your preference? There is a time for each conflict resolution style, and it would be wonderful if each of us could choose the appropriate style for the conflict facing us. Unfortunately, most of us are stuck with one style which we tend to use in all conflicts—whether it is appropriate or not. But we must continue to work toward a balance between principles and people. Over the next three lessons, we will look at how to deal with conflict in a way which preserves our principles and our relationships.

Follow Jesus

If you’d like to respond to this message or learn more about following Jesus, please reach out.