New Voice Media | Associated Baptist Press
     
 
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Home arrow Opinion arrow Opinion: Politics and the Christian practice of dialogue
 
Opinion: Politics and the Christian practice of dialogue Print E-mail
By Bob Setzer Jr.   
Tuesday, February 02, 2010

(ABP) -- Every pastor or counselor soon learns: Hearing from only one partner in a troubled marriage gives the listener a very distorted picture of what is going on. It’s not that the spouse unburdening his or her heart is deliberately misrepresenting the dynamics of the marriage. He or she may rightly complain about being treated unfairly or callously by the once beloved husband or wife. But what is almost always lacking in such revelations is any self-awareness of how one sometimes invites, encourages and empowers such a response in the other party in the relationship.

When a counselor can get both parties from a troubled marriage talking to one another rather than about one another, miracles of reconciliation and healing are possible. Such miracles are not quickly or easily won, but they do happen when honest, heartfelt, face-to-face sharing replaces the angry, bitter monologues that went before.

The power of genuine dia-logue -- a talking through rather than talking at -- was hinted at in that remarkable exchange between the president and some of his fiercest critics Jan. 29 in Baltimore. The president and the Republican members of the House of Representatives went toe-to-toe in a mostly respectful exchange. Granted, hard-liners of both the left and right -- like fans watching a title bout -- only tallied points for their “champion” as they watched the engagement. But the rest of us -- the folks mystified by why Washington has become so petty and mean -- were gratified to see political and philosophical enemies talking with one another.

The one-liners, zingers, and sound bites that have characterized recent political debate were replaced by the “Yes, but...” of thoughtful Republican critiques to the president’s usual stump speeches. And the president was able to confront those in the room who have contaminated the political climate by vilifying him instead of contributing to constructive debate. Maybe it was dreaming or wishful thinking on my part, but I thought I saw some “A-ha!” moments on both sides of the aisle: “Oh, I get it. So that’s what's driving this.”

Don’t hear me saying we’re now dancing merrily down the road to real progress on the many pressing problems facing our nation. That would require many more difficult and challenging conversations like the one last week in Baltimore. And at the end of the day, some Republicans and Democrats have such diametrically opposed visions for America that there is very little compromise to be found. Eventually, after a divisive issue has been fairly examined and debated, the matter must be brought to a vote and settled, at least for now.

But in politics as in life, the simple Christian grace of seeking out an adversary and trying to have a meaningful conversation is an act of hope and healing. For whether that adversary is an ardent political opponent or the most intimate of “enemies,” there is no possibility for a real relationship until honest dialogue begins (Matt. 18:15-18).

Long before we can “love” our enemies, we have to learn to talk with them.

-30-

Bob Setzer, Jr., is pastor of the First Baptist Church of Macon, Ga. A version of this column originally appeared as a post on his pastor’s blog, Highlites.

EDITORIAL DISCLAIMER: As part of our mission to provide credible and compelling information about matters of faith, Associated Baptist Press actively seeks a diversity of viewpoints in its columns, commentaries and other opinion-based content. Opinions expressed in these articles are not intended to represent ABP editorial policy and do not necessarily reflect the views of ABP's staff, board of directors or supporters.





Reddit!Del.icio.us!Google!Live!Facebook!Slashdot!Technorati!StumbleUpon!Spurl!Newsvine!Blinklist!Furl!Fark!Yahoo!Ma.gnolia!Free social bookmarking plugins and extensions for Joomla! websites!
Comments (7)Add Comment
...
written by John Bunyan, February 03, 2010
It is hard to see how you can call the same set of liberal talking points (i.e. lies) that the president keeps repeating over and over again as dialogue.
Lies?
written by FWN, February 03, 2010
You know, John, I hear this all the time, when wingnuts such as yourself complain about "liberal lies," but never bother to enumerate what the lies are, or provide factual evidence that the statements are, in fact, untrue.

What you seem to be talking about maybe something akin to: (1) "Iraqi weapons of mass destruction present a clear and present danger to the nation security of the U.S."; or (2) "Saddam Hussein was complicit in the 911 attacks." Both of these lies came from high ranking officials, were widely believed, but were later thoroughly discredited by factual evidence.

Therefore, I challange you to list five "liberal lies," such as those I listed, and provide empirical evidence to prove that the statements or positions are untrue. BTW, "empirical" evidence is factual and is not someone's opinion.
...
written by John Bunyan, February 04, 2010
1. We do not have lobbyists in our administration.
2. The health care deliberations were on CNN.
3. I will pull our troops out of Iraq.
4. I will close Gitmo.
5. I will take deliberation and effective action against Iran 1 January 2010.

Need some more liberal lies or are those enough?

Would you like me to list some conservative lies?

Stop placing your trust in politicians.
FWN
written by Ken, February 04, 2010
Bush wasn't the only one who thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Several prominent Democrats thought he did, too, and that's why they gave the go-ahead to invade Iraq. When the weapons weren't found, Bush became a convenient scapegoat.

John listed five liberal lies (except Obama promised the health care deliberations would be on C-Span, not CNN). Obama also promised the health care plan would "not add one dime to the deficit." Do you honestly believe that? If so, please get in touch with me. That bridge in Brooklyn is still for sale.
Irony of the comments
written by dlature, February 05, 2010
I find it revealing that the comments on this post in particular just revert right back to the same old nonsense and name calling. Shame on all of you. I would think you would have the good sense to notice that you just took this right back to non-dialogue to which the article refers.
virtues of engagement
written by Xenophon, February 06, 2010
I completely agree that open and free discussions of our differences over politics, religion, and other controversial topics are beneficial in a number of ways. Discussion develops our rational faculties and fosters an appreciation and greater understanding of positions that we might see some merit in after we are forced to consider them as well as our own views after we are pushed to think them through more carefully by a highly motivated interlocutor. Sharp but respectful discussion also holds open the possibility of developing intense and long-lasting relationships with our intellectual adversaries forged in the crucible of debate. As I have said before, my best friends are people I strongly disagree with.

The bland PC, monocultural, inclusivistic, egalitarian approach we Americans have taken to religion and other differences should be discarded for the stultifying banality that they are. We should openly debate our differences in "critical engagement" as psychologist Barry Schwartz has urged. Here is a link to his excellent article on tolerance:

http://www.terry.uga.edu/~dawndba/4500Tolerance.html
...
written by robber, February 09, 2010
generally, I believe we as a nation spend too much time thinking about and worrying about politics. it didn't used to be this way. my only point about debating is this: focus on the policies, and not the politicians, and you will be able to have a much more constructive conversation. we should promote our ideas, not our candidates.

Readers alone are responsible for the content of the comments they post here. The comments are subject to the site’s terms and conditions of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of the ABP News. Readers whose comments violate the terms of use may have their comments removed or all of their content blocked from viewing by other users without notification.
Write comment
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register
busy
 
< Prev   Next >
Copyright © 2007-2010 Associated Baptist Press, All Rights Reserved.