As we approach election season, a two-step approach to political discourse can be productive in our country
Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,
“Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” That’s a characteristic expression of St. Paul. In fact, we hear those exact words twice this week: once from Second Thessalonians and again from First Corinthians.
Speaking of “characteristic expressions,” St. Paul closes Second Thessalonians by saying: “This greeting is in my own hand, Paul’s. This is the sign in every letter; this is how I write.”
Most of us have known someone with a distinctive writing script. We could tell when a note was from our mom or dad, or a sibling or grandparent, or a close friend just by looking at the writing. Similarly, many of us had a priest, teacher, coach or mentor who had a special turn of phrase or tone of voice: We knew it was them speaking even if we couldn’t see them.
The Catholic tradition has a similar idea when it comes to the spiritual life. In Galatians 5, St. Paul names the characteristic works of the flesh (dissensions, factions, outbursts of fury, etc.), and the characteristic expressions of the Spirit (joy, patience, kindness, etc.). Similarly, St. Ignatius of Loyola, in his “Rules for the Discernment of Spirits,” names some characteristic patterns by which we can recognize the Holy Spirit’s actions in the soul and the actions of the enemy of human nature in the soul.
What’s our “characteristic expression” as Catholics, especially in a political season?
If we don’t have a ready answer to that question, maybe it’s time for us to develop one.
In a recent letter on the value of literature, Pope Francis talks about “listening to another person’s voice.” I think we could honestly say: That’s not a characteristic expression in American political discourse! Maybe it should be.
I wonder if we could develop a two-step approach to political discourse in the coming months, one that could become a characteristic expression for Catholics.
Upon hearing any political position, perhaps our first step could be: “Well, here’s what I think is right about that…” Even when we disagree, could we start by finding the best in another’s thoughts?
Then we might follow up with: “But here’s where I don’t agree with it” or “here’s where I can’t support that position.”
This two-step approach could allow us to expand our discourse beyond the sound bites that are the characteristic expression of political ads and debates. It could civilize our approach to each other, while still allowing us to engage in substantive disagreement.
This week we come to the end of August. Looking back over the past three months, a lot has happened! But Jesus is still Lord, and our day-to-day tasks at the end of August are pretty much the same as they were at the beginning of June. Looking ahead, the same can be said for the coming three months. A lot will happen! But, at the end of November, Jesus will still be Lord, and our day-to-day tasks will be pretty much the same as at the start of September. Wouldn’t it be nice if, at the end of the next three months, people were saying: “Well, whether you agree with them or not, those Catholics listen attentively, and they bring wisdom and peace into hard conversations?” That would be a great characteristic expression.
