FORGIVENESS – Series 11

Third Parties

Do ‘third parties’ have a place in a feud between two parties?  Yes.  After all, Jesus promised that where two or three are gathered together in His name, He would be there in their midst (Matthew 18:20).  Where personal outreach has failed, third parties could become an option for peace.  Sometimes, a project is beyond the ability of one person to execute, so they hire contractors.  The peace mover or initiator would often be the one who seeks the third party, as in the following scripture where one party in the dispute makes himself impossible to reach.

15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican (Matthew 18: 15-17).

In the matter of the outlawed Absalom and his estranged father, a third party was hired (2 Samuel 14:1-21).  Also, in the matter of David’s sin with Bathsheba, after dragging on for about a year during which time David would not admit his sin to make peace with God, God had to engage a third party, the prophet Nathan.  It worked (2 Samuel 12:1-13).  Nathan was also third party in resolving what could have conflagrated into another civil crisis in the Adonijah-Solomon controversy over ascension to the throne of their father David (1 Kings 1:11-35).  Third parties could be helpful, but they should be reliable people, like the “wise woman” in the David vs Absalom case.  Note the adjective, “wise” (2 Samuel 14:1).  That adjective fitted the wise and tactful spiritual man, the prophet Nathan, whom God sent to David the evasive aristocratic transgressor.

A wrong third party could be an irreparable disaster.  Often, third parties are recruited by the person initiating the peace, whether it be the offender or the offended.  In the case of David and Absalom, the third party was at the instance of the offender.  In the example of David and God, it was the Offended God that commissioned the third party.  That is the scenario we also find in Matthew 18:15-17 cited above.  The third party was the effort of the peace seeker.  None of the third parties cited above was a flippant talker.  They were wise with their words.  Third parties, then, should be sought for the purpose of gaining peace, not out of the impulse of gossip, to broadcast a tale or solicit sympathies.

Often, we hear people speak against ‘third parties’ in a rather critical self-righteous tone, even when they are in obvious need of help to manage their crisis.  Especially in disputes of marriage, some speakers make it appear as if it were repugnant irresponsibility or immaturity to let anyone into their pains; yet when they are sick in their body, they go to the medical doctor, who is a third party; or when they are in a professional or financial dilemma, they go to the ‘specialist,’ who also is a third party.

Who says that physical ailments are less private or less harmful than emotional traumas?  According to Dr David Servan-Schrieber, “emotional wound affects deep vital processes,” and “a psychological wound sets off mechanisms of the stress response … release of cortisol, adrenaline…  (including) a slowdown in the immune system … which contributes to growth and spread of cancer” (quoted in Cherie Hill).  Often, it is pride more than ignorance that keeps people from the third-party help that they could have had.  Such people eventually commit suicide or harm themselves in other ways when they can no longer cope alone. They suffered alone and died alone when they could have had a physician’s help, if they had cried out early.

Even God solicited and still solicits ‘third parties’ (Ezekiel 22:30).  He knows why.  It saves the weaker one from avoidable pains.  Where two parties are unable to resolve their difference, a third party becomes an inevitable option, discreetly chosen by both feuding sides or by the peace-seeker (1 Corinthians 6:1-3). Help does not always come to who does not call for it.  It is the sick who seeks the physician (Mark 2:17).

The Bible verily prescribes experienced third parties to help younger couples in dealing with domestic conflicts.  It says in Titus 2:3-4 that “The aged women,” which suggests age and experience (or wisdom), should “teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children.”  The Holy Bible so clearly prescribes mature “aged” women to get involved in the family matters, or “husband”-matters, of younger women.  Some younger women’s marriages are plagued not by witches and demons but by the lack of knowledge, which aged women can supply through teaching rather than by ‘deliverance prayers,’ if only they would hear.  It is curious that the marriage-saving  family ‘lecture’ here is prescribed for the woman, not the husband. Maybe Proverbs 14:1 is the explanation.

Why did Paul prescribe third parties is addressing marital issues in the church community?  Wouldn’t somebody call that a meddling in ‘private’ matters?  Well, that is the Bible, and none can be more mature or more spiritual than the God who wrote the Bible.  The reluctance to call for third-party help is sometimes borne out of ignorance, or even the pride to show that one is ‘mature’ and has been ‘managing’ one’s affairs well (even when people can see that they are dying silently and slowly).  From such proud or ignorant sufferers, helpers will generally keep their distance for fear of being embarrassed as uninvited interferers and trespassers.  They risk dying alone after suffering alone.

In Matthew 18, that classic chapter on human relations and conflicts resolution, Jesus prescribed that in the event of a dispute between two brethren, the more mature should make the peace move, alone (v.15); just the two of them “alone,” without any other ‘party.’  However, Jesus proceeds to show that this provision will not work with every character, or in every case, so He adds that where that personal approach fails, the peacemaker could initiate the assistance of one or two more witnesses, which makes not just a ‘third’ party but a ‘fourth.’  In other words, God makes allowance for the fact that there are crises and characters that are not mutually resolvable unless with the aid of other ‘parties.’  In effect, God actually endorses those ‘parties.’  Unfortunately, even third parties might not be sufficient to resolve some conflicts.   Community involvement becomes imperative.  There are people who will hear no one but the community; they respect no third party but the ‘community party.’  “And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church” (v.17).  Are third parties a scriptural option in crisis resolution?  Jesus taught so.

Some myopic theologies have sadly prevented suffering people from the help that could have saved them.  That there have been wrong third parties does not make all third parties wrong.  That somebody has abused the use of money does not make money bad.  That a knife was used for murder does not make all knives reprehensible murder weapons.  The Bible advises in James 5:16 to “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.”  The contrary option is to conceal your faults one from the other; pretend one to the other that all is fine, and slowly fry to a death that could have been avoided.