RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

Discovering Common Ground

by Jim Wallis 05-21-2009

The media coverage and analysis of President Obama’s speech at Notre Dame on Sunday largely focused on the issue of abortion. And he did speak on that issue, clearly and strongly reiterating his own approach of finding the common ground of abortion reduction between the polarized options of “pro-choice” and “pro-life,” and naming practical solutions that many on both sides of the divide can support.

Maybe we won’t agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this heart-wrenching decision for any woman is not made casually; it has both moral and spiritual dimensions. So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions; let’s reduce unintended pregnancies. Let’s make adoption more available. Let’s provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term. Let’s honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause …

But the speech was much more than a culmination of another abortion controversy in the media. After re-reading it, I think it was likely the most significant speech Obama has made in his presidency so far in regard to many of the concerns and work of the faith community. As columnist E.J. Dionne wrote:

There were many messages sent from South Bend. Obama’s opponents seek to reignite the culture wars. He doesn’t. They would reduce religious faith to a narrow set of issues. He refused to join them. They often see theological arguments as leading to certainty. He opted for humility.

President Obama began by recognizing that our difficulty in finding common ground too often lies in our imperfections – our sin – dominating us rather than calling us to work together.

We too often seek advantage over others. We cling to outworn prejudice and fear those who are unfamiliar. Too many of us view life only through the lens of immediate self-interest and crass materialism; in which the world is necessarily a zero-sum game. The strong too often dominate the weak, and too many of those with wealth and with power find all manner of justification for their own privilege in the face of poverty and injustice. And so, for all our technology and scientific advances, we see here in this country and around the globe violence and want and strife that would seem sadly familiar to those in ancient times.

But, at the same time, he emphasized the importance of civility and how we should engage in public dialogue on issues where strong, conflicting opinions can lead us to discover that common ground.

The question, then, is how do we work through these conflicts? Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort? As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate? How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without, as Father John said, demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side? … When we open up our hearts and our minds to those who may not think precisely like we do or believe precisely what we believe — that’s when we discover at least the possibility of common ground. … Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.

And the new president reminded us all that the strength of faith should produce genuine humility, rather than easy certainty, in our views, and can help lead us to a commitment to social justice.

Remember, too, that the ultimate irony of faith is that it necessarily admits doubt. It’s the belief in things not seen. It’s beyond our capacity as human beings to know with certainty what God has planned for us or what [God] asks of us. And those of us who believe must trust that [God's] wisdom is greater than our own.

And this doubt should not push us away our faith. But it should humble us. It should temper our passions, cause us to be wary of too much self-righteousness. It should compel us to remain open and curious and eager to continue the spiritual and moral debate that began for so many of you within the walls of Notre Dame. And within our vast democracy, this doubt should remind us even as we cling to our faith to persuade through reason, through an appeal whenever we can to universal rather than parochial principles, and most of all through an abiding example of good works and charity and kindness and service that moves hearts and minds.

As I wrote on Monday, this president’s willingness to confront controversy with an appeal to common values could help to change the way we address a number of divisive and controversial issues. We live in a country where we certainly know everyone will not agree on everything. In fact, it is quite an accomplishment to even get half of the country to agree on anything. Our differences, and our ability to maintain this union in spite of them, are some of our country’s greatest strengths.

President Obama laid out a strong and positive vision for how people of faith, and the nation as a whole, can work together to face the most difficult moral questions of our time in both disagreement and unity. If you have not yet read the speech, I urge that you do.

Sojourners has a long history of promoting this common-ground approach and does so again in the cover feature of our June 2009 issue, “Bridge Over Troubled Waters,” by Julie Polter.

Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • sds
    The problem with this analysis is that Obama did anything but confront the actual issue. Al Mohler has a good discussion here:

    http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3824

    The good news about Obama's evasive speech is that it signifies the increasing dearth of valid arguments by the pro-lifers. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTYyMmYyYz...
  • Eric77
    “In the end, the President's comments were entirely about how Americans should discuss or debate abortion. There was no serious consideration of abortion itself. President Obama merely talked about talking about abortion….

    “If President Obama had actually spoken of abortion itself, rather than addressing abortion only as an issue of controversy, he would have found himself defending the indefensible, which explains why he avoids this discussion at all costs.”

    Insightful words...
  • craztek
    Jim says Obama reminded us that "the strength of faith should produce genuine humility" but what Obama really said is our doubt leads to humility. As Christians, I hope we can agree that true humility is an outgrowth of faith and not doubt. I hope Obama didn't mean what he said. We will see...
  • squeaky
    I agree that humility should come out of faith. But are you saying that Christians should never have any doubt?
  • WitnessforPeace
    Of course Christians have doubts. But if they are following Jesus, they will do the work to resolve them as much as possible. In other words, honest doubters seek answers revealed from God, without using doubt as a shield for their preference for answers that differ from what God has said. An example of ungodly doubt comes right out of the Hebrew Scriptures "Did God REALLY say...." The right answer was "Yes, he did" not “Hmmm, I guess that's a gray area and whatever I do is right for me.”
    My problem with the speech is the "universal" vs. "parochial" Peacemaking, for example, is not a universal principal. Sentimentalists like to say it is. The value of human life isn't universal, either; it springs from the belief that God is the Creator, and he created significant individuals, male and female, in his image. We ARE of more value than sparrows. That is NOT a universal concept. We in the West have had trouble following it, yet it comes from our "parochial" Judeo-Christian heritage, not from the sentimental, and false, thought that all religions are the same.
    That said, common ground is still a possibility, and I like the part about "not demonizing" opponents. But we shouldn't lie about what others see as the source of ultimate value either by projecting our own heritage in a sentimental manner.
  • WitnessforPeace
    That last sentence should read:
    “But let's not kid ourselves about what others believe by projecting the best of Judeo-Christian values on other cultures”
    And I should also add that Princeton's Peter Singer comes from Western culture as well, although he is contradicting our Judeo-Christian heritage by esteeming animal life as more valuable than one month old human babies.
  • Carrpe_Diem
    What is common in all major religions is the Golden Rule. The two greatest commandments in Christianity are Golden Rule based. Confucius spoke of the Golden Rule 500 years befor Christ. Thus, I submit peacemaking has its roots in the Golden Rule and is universal.
  • WitnessforPeace
    Good point—Christianity and Confucianism do have much in common, including an emphasis on family. But that falls far short of proving universality, unfortunately. Peacemaking appears to be absent from Wahabism and many other sects. As cultures intermingle, there should be LESS conflict, not more, if peacemaking were really universal. Surely nations as religious as India and Pakistan shouldn't be locked in perpetual, nuclear armed combat, but they are. I wish you were right, but I still disagree.
    God has given “Common Grace” to each human, leading some to conclude that we are basically good. But we aren't, and that's not just reflected in individuals such as myself who don't walk the talk, but also in belief systems that are radically at variance with God's Grace.
    Blessings,
  • I totally agree with you!

    Rina
  • squeaky
    Actually, my question about Christians having doubts was not related to abortion. It was a bigger, but more general question than that. I tend to think that doubt begets faith, so doubt is not a bad thing. I'm also reacting to a time in my life when the dominant teaching was that if you doubt, your faith is lacking, and therefore, you are a bad Christian...that was what was behind my question.

    But, onto the abortion debate--You seem to be implying that pro-choice advocates don't share our universal valuing of human life. Is that what you mean?
  • WitnessforPeace
    Well put-that has certainly been my experience: asking questions leads to stronger faith. Naturally some questions remain difficult. Why is their so much suffering?
    When does life begin? Conception? Implantation? I don't have any special insight on that one-just the very ordinary insight that wanted babies are given names, people look at their ultrasound pictures; none of the friends and family of wanted babies ever worry that they are deluding themselves by pretending that this baby is alive. It starts with the pregnancy test—maybe that's when life begins ;-) When parents talk to their children in utero they don't ordinarily say “Hi Foetus, Daddy and Mommy love you”
    So by denying that an unwanted baby is human, they are in denial about what they themselves plainly believe. The fact that our culture enables this shows that respect for human life as something special is eroding.
    Thanks for asking and Blessings to all who read this,
  • letjusticerolldown
    It is interesting how this theme has kept cropping up in the posts on this blog. Frankly, it feels like in Obama's speech Jim found comfortable language to really forward a rather aggressive assault on certainty and dogma. I understand all the counterpoints about mystery, uncertainty, pluralism, ambiguity, humility, common ground, etc. etc.

    I am not even disputing the points. But I think the picture is a bit incomplete without acknowledging that from a broad cultural perspective there is a rejection of authority and dogma. To a degree I join the assault when these things become idols to worship. But I think it a delusion to think the worldviews, principalities, powers, spiritualities, etc. that seek its destruction are but innocent little voices of ambiguity, mystery, doubt and humility seeking common ground.

    I agree with the tone and objective of Obama and Wallis around issues of common ground, possibilities, problem-solving, shared values, dialogue, responsibilitiy, etc. I do not agree the way they triangle in much of the faith community in a way that is something of a 'slap-down'.

    If he got up at Notre Dame and said, "I may be wrong about abortion. I will study Catholic teaching and ask the Catholic congressional persons to study with me to review our position," the whole humility thing would take on more meaning to me.
  • WitnessforPeace
    Wellput. I could agree with much of what was said, and said so well, if it didn't have a disturbing "Let's make everything a grey area and do as we please" tinge to it. But letjusticerolldown's critique was better. "innocent little voices of ambiguity, mystery, doubt and humility seeking common ground.
    "
  • ando
    Funny how Sojourners is mobilized to "end" poverty, but seeks to find common ground on "reducing" abortion.
  • hammerud
    You end by saying, "President Obama laid out a strong and positive vision for how people of faith, and the nation as a whole, can work together to face the most difficult moral questions." I would hope abortion would not be a "difficult moral question" for anyone with a capacity for even minimal depth of thought. I would think President Obama might have that capacity so his stand on the issue is more than a little disturbing.
  • JaneinWNY
    "I would hope abortion would not be a "difficult moral question" for anyone with a capacity for even minimal depth of thought."

    That may be the most demeaning post I've ever read from a so-called Christian. Please carry on banging your head against a wall in your little echo chamber and wondering why the Vast Unlearned refuse to accept your wisdom.
  • hammerud
    I am not saying we should not have compassion for misguided people,
    particularly many of our young people, but I don't have compassion for
    people who have capacity to know better.
  • squeaky
    But...ummm...most of the people Jesus ministered, for example, the woman at the well, had the capacity to know better...and He had compassion on them....and as Christians, we're to emulate...you know, just saying...
  • hammerud
    Squeaky - Having compassion and finding common ground where there is
    no common ground are different things. I have enough compassion to
    share the gospel with unbelievers, as one beggar telling another
    beggar where to find bread, but on some of these issues there is only
    evil on their side.
  • squeaky
    How do you know there is no common ground if you have not sought to find it? If you don't believe there is, fine. But please don't denegrate the efforts of those who would seek it. Not all of us are so cynical.

    "but on some of these issues there is only
    evil on their side"

    As I said in another post--if you took the time to learn what concerns the other side had, you might find there are some areas where the two sides could work together to eliminate the concerns so babies can live. But, how can you understand where they are coming from lest you take the time to listen?
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008