Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
This post is about sex. There. That got your attention, didn't it.
It may seem like I'm imposing a stream of consciousness on you here, but stay with me. I've been listening to a Great Course on C.S. Lewis, which begins with a presentation of his apologetic argument by desire. It goes something like this...
Because we thirst, it proves the existence of life-sustaining water, of which we are intended to partake. Similarly, because we desire the good, the true, and the beautiful to such an extent that the material world can never satisfy us, it proves the existence of the supernatural world and our intended home in Heaven (capitalized because Lewis believed, as I do, that Heaven is a place). Note: just as one may die of thirst in the desert, there's no guarantee that one will make it to Heaven, only that we are made for it by design.
Further, Lewis returned the favor the post-Enlightenment, post-Marx, post-Freud moderns had done, and turned their philosophical world upside down on them. They had argued, a priori, that a higher order thing (love, for example) was a product of a lower order thing (lust). Lewis argues that the lower order thing (desire) is a shadow of an Incarnate Higher Order Thing (Love).
Which brings us to John Paul II's Theology of the Body, chastity, and sex. Coincident with my Great Course listening, I attended the first of six TOB for Teens class with my soon-to-be fourteen-year-old last night. There, I learned that, in the 126 lectures JPII gave which became the TOB, his teaching emphasized the intended purpose of the body and human sexuality. TOB is an invitation to chastity, which is using one's body exclusively in self-giving authentic love, which we were made to both give and receive. TOB teaches that sex in this light is not only good, but serves our highest calling.
How does this connect to politics? It occurs to me that often, both as a Catholic and a conservative, how I live and my attitude in casual relationships often stand as a rebuke to those who don't share my religion or my politics. I think that's a problem. Instead, I'd like people to feel attracted and invited to both my faith and my politics, because I believe so strongly that they are true.
To that end, I think I have to be less defensive about both, and to engage openly in dialogue without trying to win every argument. The truth (or Truth) always ultimately wins. It doesn't have to be me who wins and it doesn't have to be now.
Do you encounter the same struggles? Do you have any techniques for attraction you've developed?
- Comment (39)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Nov '11
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
These are wise words. I find myself to be put off by overly strident arguments, even when I agree with them. A little bit of humor and humility, and just putting the argument out there and letting people draw their own conclusions is a far more appealing way to change hearts and minds.
Dec '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
I always try to find a common point of agreement then work toward the divergence. Where ideas start to diverge, but still very close to the point of agreement, is usually the best place move the opponent because the movement does not have to be dramatic. The give a man a fish/teach him to fish is a great example. We can agree with the left that man should eat, but moving straight to the cliche requires to much distance from the point of agreement. The next step would be to ask the question, "how often should man eat?" Every day is the obvious answer and another point of agreement. Next move to the better method of provisioning not just the eating but the every day occurrence of it. The left's need to provide immediate satisfaction is still met while also proving the broader point that no one should be forced to feed another capable man every day. It's not necessary to point to the destination, only to the next step toward it.
Edited on June 15, 2012 at 4:12pmDec '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
These are good. Humor, humility, incrementalism built on agreement. Would you agree to kindness and a generosity of spirit? A "give credit where credit is due" approach?
How far do you credit good intentions? I have a little problem with this one.
Dec '11
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Mothership_Greg
These are wise words. I find myself to be put off by overly strident arguments, even when I agree with them. A little bit of humor and humility, and just putting the argument out there and letting people draw their own conclusions is a far more appealing way to change hearts and minds. ยท 26 minutes ago
Good words. I would add honesty to the list.
Hopefully, Tom Lindholtz will comment to the post. He talked about this on the Intel Group Audio Meet-up. He has worked in the UC system and learned how to ask and listen to bring about change.
Dec '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Intentions are an easy point of agreement. Indeed, the left often impugns our motives and then disregards everything else we might say. Demonstrating that we have the same, or at least similar, ends in mind can open the door to the next statement. Of course, sometimes the left needs to be shown what their intentions really are, and if nefarious we can't move farther.
May '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
You are too kind 10 Cents. Thank you. But that is correct. In a nutshell, we've all observed that people love to talk about themselves; in this case, about their ideas and their thinking on particular subjects. So the first key is asking questions.
In addition to this, while at UC, and in the context of talking about my Christian faith, I came to the belief that, while from my perspective what I might say was Truth, from their perspective I was just sharing my opinion on my worldview. If I wasn't willing to listen to them, why should I expect them to be willing to listen to me? So, humility is the second key.
The objective is to learn, not to teach. (Though teaching always happens.) But you can't fake it. Fake humility and/or fake interest in their ideas are obvious and an immediate turn off.
At this point it just becomes a case of a seriously interesting conversation....if you can find someone who is a liberal and who is truly open minded and interested in a mutually rewarding relationship. There aren't a lot of those folks out there. Good luck.
Jun '12
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Two questions I like to ask, and not just to those I disagree with.
A. Why?
ie. Why do you say that? Why is that good? Why is that bad?
B. Then what happens?
ie "I think we should do...whatever" Then what happens?
The purpose is not so much to win the argument, as to get people to think. I have found a lot of people have not really thought about a position they hold...myself included.
Jun '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Yes, I do have the kind of feelings you describe. As a Mormon, I don't drink alcohol, coffee, or tea, and I don't smoke. I often fear that others not of my faith take this as some sort of implicit rebuke when they have a cup of coffee or a drink in my presence.
But, at least for me, it's not like that at all. I am simply being obedient to what I consider a truth and I know that it is a "truth" that others don't share.
WC: And I find the same phenomena (the "implicit rebuke" part) when liberals (there are a few in Utah) learn I'm a conservative. My approach, when asked, is to explain some key principles (the existence of an objectively-true moral code, respect for the past, and how utopian thought never works), but try not to be argumentative or overbearing. And, of course, the most important thing is to live the principles of conservatism.
Edited on June 15, 2012 at 3:58pmApr '12
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
I'm all in favor of articulating what's good about conservatism, or Catholicism, or committed marital sex (YES!). But I do think that many people (including some very smart people) are lacking in their powers of discernment because they are too afraid to be critical.
May '12
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
I'm a big fan of the Dennis Prager rule is discussing politics and religion: Clarity Over Agreement.
If you can make your case clear, then you don't need to go for agreement. Since you can't control another person's response, you can show where you might differ with another point of view. And to me, that is what makes for an attractive argument.
Oct '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Western Chauvinist:
...It occurs to me that often, both as a Catholic and a conservative, how I live and my attitude in casual relationships often stand as a rebuke to those who don't share my religion or my politics. I think that's a problem...
To that end, I think I have to be less defensive about both, and to engage openly in dialogue without trying to win every argument.
I disagree. Sort of.
If my beliefs stand as a rebuke to others, they will probably do so no matter how pleasantly I present them.
As a conservative and devout christian, I always try to approach discussions of sensitive issues in a deferential, civil, and loving manner, and yet the other person still often concludes that I am an irrational bigot, and leaves feeling attacked and insulted. The breakdown happens not because I am too defensive about my beliefs, but because others are too intolerant of them. I can't help that.
I agree that we should not try to win every argument -- because minds change slowly over time. I just disagree that a more deferential approach to others is the key to changing minds.
Apr '12
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Top marks for first sentence to draw me into your post! My sons have been brought up with my moral code which is Protestant and with approach to the meaning of sex vs lust and also alcohol because that can be blamed for behaviour. My in laws have such different morals to me and are all Ivey League degrees and investment banker pedigrees. I was dazzled by them and thought I was the one missing out. But these teachings on love are given by elders who know the life consequences of behaviors. My sons are loving, respectful hard working and will make faithful husbands and good fathers. They see their father, who I do love but has certainly tried me, and in their late teens, now try to teach him. I find it interesting because they ask him questions and they also state their position. Ricochet gives me, a desert flower, water to believe in this moral code.
Aug '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Blake
As a conservative and devout christian, I always try to approach discussions of sensitive issues in a deferential, civil, and loving manner, and yet the other person still often concludes that I am an irrational bigot, and leaves feeling attacked and insulted.
In my experience, the times this hasn't happened was when I was first good friends with people who didn't share my beliefs before letting them know what, exactly, my beliefs were.
I didn't present my beliefs to them. At least, not through words. Rather, I just lived in a different way, and when my friends finally asked questions of me about why I lived differently, I answered them patiently and cautiously, using language I thought they would understand.
The approach I just described would strike many as too timid, especially men. If "time is growing short" is etched on your heart, then it may strike you as wickedly timid -- cowardly.
Loving others is not enough. Expressing love in a form they can recognize is also necessary. It takes wisdom to recognize being disagreed with as love, and you can't expect many people to have that wisdom, at least not at first.
Dec '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
10 cents ...
I would add honesty to the list.
...
Honesty is tricky too, though... truth in love and pearls before swine and all that. I'm certainly not advocating dishonesty. I just think you have to know your audience extremely well.
For example, I have two nephews on opposite ends of the political spectrum. They got into a telling exchange after liberal nephew Facebook posted the following:
Conservative nephew pointed out (the truth) that people only build homes and roads out of their self-interest of earning a living, not kindness. Equally highly educated and intelligent liberal nephew responded that conservative nephew politicizes everything! (continued)
Aug '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
As far as sex goes, I think one thing the modern world could use is more high-quality literature from a chaste point of view. Not propaganda or didactic doggerel, but literature that just happens -- almost by accident, it seems -- to assume that chastity is a delightful and interesting thing.
A chaste perspective is not only romantic, but also very funny -- think of all the absurdities surrounding sex that chaste people tend to be more aware of than unchaste people.
Though I love creative writing, especially poetry, I have no warrant for supposing that my own efforts in this direction amount to much. But I'm sure someone could. KatieVs told me she collects love stories, so maybe she knows.
Dec '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
And further, that conservative nephew is to be pitied for said politicization.
Now, part of me would like to point out to liberal nephew that perhaps he is to be pitied for having such a low tolerance for the truth (when I took him on on a different topic, very gently, he ended the conversation by saying it depressed him).
Liberals have a whole deck of grievance cards to play when they're uncomfortable with the direction of the discussion, including the "you politicize everything!" card, and "you're harshing my mellow!" card. What do you do with that?
In this case, I chose to abstain from telling the truth.
Jan '12
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
As far as sex goes, I think one thing the modern world could use is more high-quality literature from a chaste point of view. Not propaganda or didactic doggerel, but literature that just happens -- almost by accident, it seems -- to assume that chastity is a delightful and interesting thing.
ยท 11 minutes ago
True, but chastity (complete abstinence) is not an end in itself. The problem, even the analogy to thirst presented by the orthodox Chesterton, is that appetites are taken as though they were the private possessions of individuals only. Once, however, they are understood in their ethical context, understanding broadens. It's no longer a question of whether or not, but of when and under what circumstances.
The natural appetite for food, when taken in merely an individual context, can soon become gluttony. The appetite becomes spiritualized in shared feasts, which begin in the family. Surely, no Christian misses the significance of the Last Supper. The appetite for sexual congress similarly can be degraded in promiscuity, but since even its "natural" logic aims at the perpetuation of the species, its spiritualization in marriage follows immediately. There complete abstinence is no virtue at all.
Edited on June 15, 2012 at 6:46pmDec '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
As far as sex goes, I think one thing the modern world could use is more high-quality literature from a chaste point of view. Not propaganda or didactic doggerel, but literature that just happens -- almost by accident, it seems -- to assume that chastity is a delightful and interesting thing.
A chaste perspective is not only romantic, but also very funny -- think of all the absurdities surrounding sex that chaste people tend to be more aware of than unchaste people.
...
To emphasize your first point Midge, chaste love, definitionally, must be the most delightful and interesting way of being because it is the highest order love.
And in a related matter, I'm finding it easier these days to feel compassion toward my liberal compatriots, because I've discovered the air inside their liberal bubble is stiflingly stale, lacking in delight and the end of desire, which is joy. Modern liberalism is joyless.
My compassion is limited though, once liberals have attained the power to affect our freedom, as is now the case. These people have to be defeated.
Jan '12
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
Again to the Rattlesnake (bad image for a discourse on chastity, but we all know you better):
What is the intercourse proper in a chaste relationship? The sharing of conversation, of course. There a man can learn (if he doesn't already know) that woman too is a spirit, who, with the aid of language, attempts to clarify her feelings in thoughts. Whatever she might just hint at wanting to share, as may happen in flirtation, she must here make explicit.
The man learns to pull away at least some of his attention from the curves and to focus on the expression of the eyes, the shadow of the smile, the care-free toss of the hair. That voluptuous thing that was merely an object of desire now becomes a real, living person, a cherished interlocutor. Together they can belay the urgencies of the moment as they share in confidence their most abiding aspirations.
Edited on June 16, 2012 at 4:06amDec '10
Re: Conservatism as an Invitation, Not a Rebuke
No, no, No No! /sorry, that was just too much fun to resist! Chastity =/= complete abstinence. God did not build in desire to torture us. Chastity is self-sacrificial love ordered for the good of the other. It is the best imitation human relations can achieve of the Divine Love of the triune God outside of Heaven.