Religion and Politics: Let's Have a Civil Talk

I have decided to republish some of the Faith in the Public Square columns that weren't posted on this blog. Although this column, which was published in March 2007 mentions a forum I was holding, I think that the essence of its message is appropriate considering all that's been happening of late.

**********************************************************

Faith in the Public Square
Lompoc Record
March 11, 2007


It's been about 15 months since I began writing regularly for the Lompoc Record, and it's been a privilege to share my ideas about religion and its place in the public square with the readers of this paper. There's a lot of interest in both subjects - religion and public life - especially at the points where these two intersect for good or ill. My intention in writing this column is to stimulate the conversation and to argue that it's possible to be religious and responsibly share the public square.

Last fall, a Faith in the Public Square forum at the Lompoc Public Library elicited considerable interest in having more public conversations about religion and its place in American society. With that in mind, I'd like to issue an invitation to the community and the readers of this column to join me in marking Faith in the Public Square's anniversary with another forum (though this is a bit late, as far as anniversary celebrations go).
The next Faith in the Public Square Forum will occur at 7 p.m. Wednesday, March 28, in the sanctuary of First Christian Church, 1517 West College Ave., across from Clarence Ruth Elementary School. There will be ample opportunity to share ideas and concerns about the community, the nation and the world. I hope, of course, to get some ideas for future columns. And, of course, there will be cookies, coffee, tea and maybe some “Kool Aid!”
As for the topic of conversation that evening, I thought that with a presidential race heating up (even though the first primaries and caucuses are almost a year away) and with the ongoing but divisive war in the Middle East, it would be good to talk about civility.
It shouldn't come as a surprise that with all that's going on in the world today, the level of uncivil rhetoric is rising. You can hear it from right and from left, and it's almost a badge of honor, if you're a radio or TV talk show host, to be rude, inconsiderate, and uncivil. The AM radio dial is especially full of commentators spewing angry and bitter messages that poison the national conversation.

Even if at times they stumble across legitimate issues, their methodology seems similar to the gladiatorial battles of ancient Rome. For some reason, we like to see blood - whether real or symbolic. They say that sex sells, but apparently, so does anger. Unfortunately, when we buy into this angry rhetoric, it impairs our ability to have fruitful conversations about important issues that face the nation and the world.

And so we come back to civility, which too often seems to have become a lost art form in American life. With culture wars and hot wars to be fought, civility is seen as passé or a sign of disengagement. Candidates who refuse to sling mud become irrelevant. Compromise is a sign of weakness; indeed, to consider the voice of the other is seen as a weakness.

Success, however, depends on our ability to work together. Diplomacy, not brute force, ultimately resolves conflict. Indeed, history shows that civility was born from the trader's need to converse with the other with respect and honor.
Great Britain's Chief Rabbi, Jonathan Sacks, has written something worth considering:

“Civility is an ethic across boundaries. It means respecting strangers. It is a way of saying that though we come from diverse backgrounds, we share a moral universe. Though we are different, we belong to something - the common good - that embraces us both. Without civility there is no society, merely the clamor of individuals and the clash of conflicting ghettos.” (Times
Online
, Jan. 20, 2007)

It is concern for the common good that gets lost in the angry rhetoric of today, so it might be worth considering this bit of ancient wisdom:

“A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.“The tongue of the wise dispenses knowledge, but the mouths of fools pour out folly.” (Proverbs 15:1-2, NRSV)

It would seem wiser to choose the soft answer and the knowledgeable tongue, rather than to choose their opposite. I'd like to try practicing this skill on March 28 as we gather to talk a bit of religion and politics in a way that is both civil and productive.
Dr. Bob Cornwall is pastor of First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) of Lompoc (www.lompocdisciples.com). His blog is found at http://pastorbobcornwall.blogspot.com and he can be contacted at lompocdisciples@impulse.net or First Christian Church, P.O. Box 1056, Lompoc, CA 93438.
March 11, 2007

Comments

Popular Posts