Is there some emotion or response I can grab hold of to fill the gap between feeling disappointed and feeling angry? I am not yet angry at the lack of principled leadership in organizations such as government and faith-based communities. I am, however, more than disappointed. I don’t know how to define my unease or how to resolve my disappointment. Without some potential remedy, I am concerned that anger may result.
I am a person who believes at my core in the power and promise of hope. Lately, I find myself spending more and more time interacting with a mood-set seemingly resistant to hope.
Hope implies a long view, looking to the future as an antidote for the present.
My long view of politics and the effect of faith-based organizations is not, at the moment, hopeful. Not all political or faith-based organizations are lacking in principled leadership. Our sources of news do not, however, routinely present good examples of principled political or faith-based leadership.
My present focus finds its origin in the ethical, moral, political, and practical aspects of what I see and hear via various news sources and social media. It is also tied to my own experience with various political and religious leaders. I am having a difficult time resolving current concerns with my hope that in time, the cause of my concerns will be diminished.
It may all boil down to these two issues: 1) we don’t listen to one another which affects our ability to have civil conversations and 2) we seem to have forgotten about the importance of serving the common good.
To listen is to become acquainted with another point of view, assuming that one goal of conversation is to promote new understanding and to develop a new perspective. What’s the point of conversation if all we attempt to communicate is our point of view without learning about or considering the point of view of others?
The saying, “ a rising tide lifts all boats,” is a notion that doesn’t get much consideration in conversations or deliberations. There are winners and losers in life. What we have forgotten is that one obligation of winners is to comfort and care for those who may see themselves as losers.
I prefer the terms survivors and victims to winners and losers. Those who survive should take on the causes of suffering of those who see themselves as victims. This behavior can only occur when we all keep in mind the importance of serving the common good.
One quick example – the US government has just voted to increase the national debt ceiling so the needs of the country can be financed. The survivors will say the country has needs greater than its resources. Therefore, the government must spend revenues the government does not have to meet the needs of our country. Victims, in this case, are those who despite more money in the system, will still be homeless, hungry, oppressed and marginalized. They will still be victims of injustice and inequality.
You and I cannot sustain our lives by spending more than we earn.
Since the government earns the largest part of its income from taxes and fees collected from its citizens, they never have to feel the pain of coming up short at the end of the month. They never have to decide on which bills to pay. If the government requires more money to function, they raise taxes and fees on individuals and corporations. They also borrow money that we victims (or our descendants) will have to repay at some point. And still, basic needs of the people are not met. And still, there is suffering.
This kind of suffering is one of the concerns addressed in our country’s Declaration of Independence. Perhaps its time to seek redress of present-day grievances. I am not a revolutionary nor am I confident that such actions will change any behaviors in Washington or various state capitals.
We are too fragmented as a country to be able to identify as US citizens first, with all other designations and priorities second. There is no vision, no agenda, no plan, no budget. All we have is a collection of requests from special interest groups who pay scant attention to the concept of the common good. There is no hope that those who have the resources feel any obligation to tend to those who still suffer as victims. It is no wonder that many feel angry and powerless.
Until we serve the least, the last, and the lost, we cannot fulfill our obligations as US citizens to ease the suffering of those unable or too angry to care any longer. Giving up on hope is a disastrous conclusion.
My hope for political and faith-based organizations is that they will rediscover the reason for their being. Politics is to promote the common good and to provide all citizens with a chance for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Faith-based communities find their purpose in easing the suffering of those who have no advocates. Faith-based groups’ time and energy ought not to be squandered on deciding who and what groups deserve to be “saved.” Their purpose ought to be in reaching out to all people and offering unconditional love or unconditional positive regard to those who are seeking true community.
I hope we, as a country, will find our purpose for being. I worry that we will not remember to exercise our humanity towards others until the suffering of ever-increasing numbers of victims makes problem-solving impossible.
It’s time for political and faith-based leaders to step up to create problem-solving opportunities that renew the concept of the common good and at the same time, relieve folks who are suffering amidst the prosperity of borrowed funds.
