Photo by Jeffrey Wegrzyn on Unsplash

We are civil with each other in dialogue and in our differences because we do not know everything. And the things we do know are often nuanced and shaded by our experiences, language, and presuppositions.

If Solomon could declare that everything he thought and lived amounted to vanity along the way of his pilgrimage toward ultimate truth, surely I can admit a little vanity and striving after wind in my own life. 

Humility before God and mankind is part of the soil of wisdom.

Humility and honesty are mutually dependent and benefit from their synergy.

Honesty is the antidote to all hypocrisy:

Honesty with ourselves.

Honesty with God.

Honesty with those closest to us.

Honesty with the world.

Honesty with our doubts and uncertainties.

Honesty that reserves possibility that we could be wrong …

… that we might learn something.

In a general way, I will say that there is plenty of hypocrisy in the world and it is a sin … maybe one of the biggest sins … because it is rooted in the lies we tell ourselves about ourselves … especially when we tell ourselves that we have no hypocrisy in us.

I really do not have time, energy, nor inclination to be a full-time hypocrisy cop.

But, if I were a cop, I might continue writing very objective tickets, one at a time, for running red lights.

I'd write the ticket and not make a speech about it.

Tell it to the judge

When one is convinced that one is speaking truth because one has sought earnestly to process truth, one does not need to join the hypocrisy police force.

Hypocrisy usually reveals itself without any outside assistance. If something is true in one context, it is true in the next.

Then, one asks, "Am I thinking and speaking generally or specifically?"

Specific situations may prompt me to think generally.

Generalized thinking prompted by specific stimuli is still general.

When I comment generally, the application is left to the reader.

My intent is irrelevant because I am trying to think more deeply than the moment or context.

In all of this, our humility and honesty prompt us to be civil because we are spinning in a loop of tentative certainty about our own opinions and perspectives on truth. 

Jesus is truth and we understand objective truth more fully as we are drawn toward Jesus and love those whom Jesus loves.

Civility is important to me because of who I am-not just because of who anyone else is.

I am a child of God and a follower of Jesus who has called me to love my neighbor as myself.

I can't force civility on anyone.

No can I respond to their incivility with incivility.

It doesn't mean I don't tell the truth or believe lies.

It doesn't mean I approve or pretend to approve.

It doesn't mean I stop resisting wrong.

It's my choice.

What must I do then?

I'll continue to try and be civil because my basic conviction about the dignity of every human cannot change just because I find it hard to respect their choices or views. That is a predetermined conviction and if it does not work out, oh well.

There will always be a way for me to express my feelings of repulsion or resistance to a tide of culture that offends my sensibilities. 

But I choose to treat people as kindly as I can without criticizing those who find that difficult or impossible.

And … I will choose my indignation toward what might be uncivil very carefully, in context, and with a sense of balance… respectfully.

I really do want to be fair, so I am going to examine one or two of my assumptions – yet again. I do that every time I am challenged …

… well, most every time.

We are not primarily critics of culture as citizens of God's Kingdom – but we are not outside of culture. We are participants and decision makers. 

We are the kings. We are in authority over this dominion. That brings a heavy responsibility upon us to listen, think, and speak.

I do think it is fair to let public people speak for themselves. We can read what they say in context or listen to their speeches in context. We can try to include context in our quotes and quote accurately. We should try to do that. We may come to some of the same conclusions, but at least we will do so with understanding and sometimes, we will correct ourselves.

Ultimately, it is about the idea.

For the Christian, it is about the intersection, contrast, complement, or enlightenment that is present in the space between idea and gospel. The gospel is the bigger idea for us and it includes some presumptions about a Great Commission and a Great Commandment as well as a fundamental ethic that is not shared by all in society – the ethic of the Kingdom of God.

I have no basis for arguing Kingdom ethics with those who do not share that presumption. I do not require or expect people to buy into my assumptions without that presumption in place.

I am not a big fan of exploiting momentary Fruedian slips or fleeting hashtags as the sole basis for criticism of public policy, but sometimes people really do say what they mean in a few sentences – maybe within 280 characters … at least what they mean in the moment.

How does that translate into policy and what is my responsibility as a citizen two kingdoms?

I think we might also want to pay attention to the relationship between words and actions. In the final analysis, most ideas and prevailing narratives are much bigger than a few individuals, no matter how high profile they may be.

So, I find that going from specific to general and then, back to specific is often necessary to insure that the magnetic north pole is tuning my compass.

I will be working this out for quite some time.

When I stop, please do not send flowers to my grave, but make a memorial gift to some worthy cause.

This is my stream of consciousness on civility.