Our Tasmanian Synods are largely harmonious affairs where we can share views, agree, disagree and modify with due respect for difference.<\/p>\n
I came across\u00a0an article The Loss of Civility (& its Consequences)<\/a> in CASE by Trevor Cairney<\/a>. While the article refers more generally to Australian public affairs and in particular our political discourse, or rather lack of it at this time, it did occur to me from my time in other places that the article could be required reading for all synod representatives, including me!<\/p>\n The incisive article has to do with the lack of respect and resultant lack of courtesy and civility in Australian society.<\/p>\n In countries like Australia, France, Canada, Britain and the USA, political parties seem to be at war with each other rather than setting debating and agreeing on policies that will help to shape nations for the common good. Political parties spend millions of dollars to tear policies and each other apart. Issues are rarely debated with transparency and civility, lies are told, tricks played and voters deceived. What such behaviour can unwittingly encourage is extreme responses by minority groups in any society that is fuelled by the behaviour of our leaders as they provide simplistic messages designed to raise fear and incite anger, rather than opening up reasoned civil discussion.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The article refers to Os Guiness who\u00a0is one of my favourite Christian thinkers. In his new book, ‘The\u00a0 Case for Civility: And Why Our Future Depends On It<\/a>‘,\u00a0\u00a0Os Guiness refers to the\u00a0need for civility in the USA and western socieities,<\/p>\n “Civility must truly be restored. It is not to be confused with\u00a0 niceness and mere etiquette or dismissed as squeamishness about differences. It\u00a0 is a tough, robust, substantive concept\u2026 and a manner of conduct that will be\u00a0 decisive for the future of the American republic” (p. 3).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The CASE article argues, using Guiness’s idea of civility and\u00a0“a civil public square”, that,<\/p>\n a civil society, that is able to demonstrate a “civil public square”, may well avoid the type of false tolerance that we have witnessed in Australia in recent times as diverse political parties have attempted to maintain a government where no party has a clear majority. A mature civil society will need to enable minority groups to have a voice, but they must not be allowed to seek to establish their position by yelling the loudest or the longest. Guinness reminds us that in a democracy all have a right to believe anything, but this does not mean, “anything anyone believes is right”. We need to expect differences of opinion in a civil society and also to work out ways to discuss them and reach consensus for the common good. Christians have a part to play in such public discourse, participating openly as people of faith with godliness, humility and respect for the rights of others to participate as well.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Wise words. May God give us the grace to live them. See you at Synod!\u00a0 \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n CASE Article,\u00a0 The Loss of Civility (& its Consequences)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Our Tasmanian Synods are largely harmonious affairs where we can share views, agree, disagree and modify with due respect for difference. I came across\u00a0an article The Loss of Civility (& its Consequences) in CASE by Trevor Cairney. While the article … Continue reading