Customer Reviews

Uncommon Decency: Christian Civility in an Uncivil World

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Mouw delves into a helpful critique of how people, especially people who profess to be Christians, can interact in the world in a positive and helpful manner. The book is an easy read that humbly critiques as well as offers ideas for insightful ways of seeing how one's belief system can be developed to promote respect and positive civil discourse. I found especially helpful his description of the problem of "triumphalism" which is a concern to me in our society. This is a good read that will promote solid self-examination in a fresh manner. I felt edified and challenged after I had read the book, and I recommend it as an individual reading as well as reading the book as a group.

Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Seminary in Pasadena, wrote this short and simple book a dozen years ago, but it is, perhaps, even more timely today than when it first appeared. The last several presidential elections indicate that our country and our churches are badly divided over a broad range of important issues like gay rights, abortion, stem cell research, the place of America in the world, global economics, health care, and the list goes on. Many people employ a military metaphor to describe our so-called "culture wars." President Bush divided our world in terms of an "axis of evil." In a war, to state the obvious, you have friends and foes, enemies and allies, the goal being for Good (that would be "our" side) to defeat Evil ("their" side). Sharp, partisan and demonizing rhetoric about these issues divides us even further. One is left to exasperate with Rodney King, who lamented after police who had publicly beaten him were acquitted and riots erupted, "why can't we all just get along?"

Mouw shows how and why Christians should not only be people of conviction, but people of compassion and civility. We are, he reminds us, to "pursue peace with everyone" (Hebrews 12:14), and to "show every courtesy to everyone" (Titus 3:2). Civility does not mean we have to like everyone we meet, forfeit our convictions to a relativistic perspective, or befriend people as a manipulative ploy to evangelize them. Rather, it means caring deeply about our civitas and its public life, because God so cares. After defining the nature and parameters of Christian civility, Mouw investigates its implications for our speech, attitudes, pluralistic society, sexual mores, other religions, and leadership in a fallen world. He explores the limits of civility, when there is no "on the other hand." His chapter on hell asks whether we can believe in hell and still be civil. In his final two chapters he cautions against out tendencies to triumphalism, and trying to usher in the kingdom of God right now, as opposed to appreciating the ways and means of a patient, slow-moving God who loves His creation deeply and longs to redeem it.

I heard Richard Mouw give a talk on this book a dozen years ago. I often have turned to this book since then to remind myself of what the tone of Christianity should sound like in this day and age. Too often, I am afraid, Christians express their convictions without much generosity, tact, or sensitivity for those who do not share these beliefs. I do not see this as the example of Jesus who saved the "strong language" for those who already understood grace, and still needed some pointers on how to live. This book is a breath of fresh air and gives good general guidance on how a person can hold beliefs that may run counter to the values of any one particular culture ... and do so in a manner that reflects a heart and spirit of love. It is a book that genuinly wrestles with tough issues without shying away from them, and shows where Christians have cracks. This is one of my favorite books to remind me of how Christians, myself included, should try to live.

This call for civility in public (and particularly religious) dialogue is vitally important. In order for our multi-cultural world to truly thrive, we need to learn to talk together *with* those who hold views other than our own. We live in a world where public discourse usually devolves into the demonization of one's "opponent." Mouw's book offers a helpful discussion of how one can hold onto one's convictions while respecting the worldview and world in which one's friends live.
Mouw is a leader, both as a scholar and as a Christian, in the quest to foster healthy interfaith dialogue where the beliefs of all parties are taken seriously and disagreements are allowed in friendship.

Love thy enemy is a virtue of Christianity that seems more and more lost. "Uncommon Decency: Christian Civility in an Uncivil World" is an urging to readers to remember the Christian values of love and respect even for those who do not follow your faith and beliefs. Stating that civility is the key to a better understanding on all sides of an argument, too often Americans fall into name calling and being truly awful to each other to get anything done. "Uncommon Decency" is a powerful read with a stronger message, very highly recommended.

I can't remember who said it, but one of my favorite quotes is "The gospel is offensive enough, we do not have to be.." The problem is that too many believers are seen as offensive. We can tend to categorize (or even justify) our "offensiveness" as honesty, or speaking in love.

Richard Mouw's book challenges this view. In this updated version of his book first published in the early 90's Uncommon Decency: Christian Civility In An Uncivil World , Mouw argues that Christian's need to cultivate civility.

Does this preclude Christian's holding strong convictions? Not at all. Civility does not require that we discard are strong convictions or doctrinal beliefs, but it does mean that we change how we present them and how we act in discussing them.

Does civility mean we have to like everybody? No. But again, it does mean that we must be aware of how we treat others, even those we find hard to get along with or even dislike.

Regardless of who it is we are speaking to; regardless of how we feel about them; regardless of what they believe, we are to treat them, as Mouw powerfully points out, as persons who are created in God's image who are still within reach of divine mercy.

This is not an easy thing to do. In fact, it is only something which is `grace' empowered, and it is something which we need to work at daily.

Oh how I wish many in the church would read this. Too often we come across as angry and arrogant as well as offensive, both in terms of our witness and in our everyday life. We have the truth. We have the Gospel. Let us begin to present the truths of scripture with love, compassion, with civility and let our loves mirror this even in rush hour traffic, or the crowded mall. The years of Christian experience and service flow from Mouw's pen in this book, and we should listen to him as an elder of the global Church.

Highly recommended.

Fuller Seminary professor and president, Richard Mouw wrote "Uncommon Decency" about the crisis of civility back in 1992. That bygone year seems like an eternity ago in the post-9/11 era of cable news loudmouths, Red States, Blue States, and economic meltdowns. Almost universally, people now acknowledge that things have actually gotten more divisive not less. Mouw does not suggest that Christians retreat or merely try to get along. Instead, he suggests civil engagement within proper limits. He draws from the just war tradition to discuss the extent and limits of Christian civility. Mouw's simple suggestion that crusaders need to check their motives and methods before acting is both simplistic and necessary. Thankfully Mouw's advice has not been discredited by the changes of the past decade. Instead, his proposals have the benefit of rarely been tried.

To describe our modern situation, Mouw quotes W. B. Yeats, "The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity." Mouw argues that these two extremes have contributed to the downfall of civil society, and Christians especially should live out a "convicted civility." For the rest of the book, he tries to show what civility looks like. Although his analysis is very helpful, Mouw spends little time articulating the content of his convictions. They are assumed out of the Reformed and evangelical tradition.

I personally would love to see a book written directly to those who "lack all conviction." There are many in our world who start out nice. For these people, civility has never been hard. These people have the skills and abilities to become leaders in our communities and churches. Their leadership is ineffective precisely because their conviction remains elusive. For those readers, "Uncommon Decency" only gives them permission to be passionate. It teaches that niceness does not preclude conviction. Unfortunately, the book does not guide them into the passionate life.

Mouw has a very important message that he clearly lays out, and I believe it is one that we need to hear. Although I agree strongly with his position and call in this book, I did not find his arguments very compelling, and I wonder how convincing this book would be to someone who is not committed to civility in their discourse.

Mouw quotes Martin Marty's observation, "One of the real problems in modern life is that people who are good at being civil often lack strong conviction and people who have strong convictions often lack civility." This book is his attempt at trying to encourage a "convicted civility". Mouw's civility is not `niceness'. Civility has the root purpose of acknowledging the other person's Imageo Dei (Image of God).

Mouw wants us to start with ourselves. "Christians are a people who are in the process of being `made right' by the grace of God...This means our message to the larger society will be credible only if we can invite others to become more like us. I know that sounds arrogant, But if we are not able to point to our own comunal life to illustrate the righteousness we want for everyone, our message is not credible."

Civility goes beyond looking at ourselves. Mouw identifies one of the problems of our pluralistic world is that we settle for pragmatic or transactional interactions. I want A, another group wants B, so the other group supports me to get A and I support them to get B. This is not bad, but it is limited. Instead Mouw advocates for interaction that transforms both groups. "We cannot hope to bring about effective change unless we are willing to be changed. This is profoundly biblical idea. But it is also a risky one to pursue." He has a long discussion about why discussions cannot be primarily about evangelism. Yes, if we are real with people, then we will talk to them about our faith if appropriate to the situation. But having a discussion in order to evangelize is not being real with the other. Our interest has to be about them, not about what we can share with them.

One of the most important things I read was Mouw's quote of Chesterton, "We risk engaging in idolatry, not only when we worship false gods but also when we set up false devils! God is not honored when we are unfair to people with whom we disagree." If for no other reason than not `not bearing false witness', we need to be sure that our representation of those that disagree with us is accurate. Can you state the position of the person that you disagree with and have them agree that you understand? Without listening enough to understand the other, we cannot have a conversation. We can speak at one another. But a conversation is more about the listening than the speaking.

Mouw lays out some rules for disagreement that are based on Just War Theory. 1) Is my cause just? (Is my heart right about why I am having the disagreement?) 2) Am I sustained in my commitments by the wisdom of competent authorities? (This is mostly about not being a lone ranger and insuring that you have someone trusted that believes that the disagreement is just. 3) Is my move beyond mere civility a choice of last resort? (Can the conversation be continued civilly in any format? 4) Is success likely? (This does not mean, will you win the discussion? There are times when you will be a `hopeless resistant' but you should not use `irrational use of force'. 5) Are the means I am employing proportionate to the goals I want to promote? (Physically fighting with someone over the right to be a pacifist destroys the content of the argument. Mouw goes on to discuss why kindness in warfare is important. "...we can never forget that they are indeed person who are created in God's image and who are still within the reach of divine mercy."

Mouw reflects repeatedly in this book on conflicts that are lost. He is not sure all conflicts are worth it in the end. I think that acknowledgement is important before we attempt to take on the world.

Originally published on my blog Bookwi.se

You may be discouraged by a lack of meaningful discourse between those in the church (those claiming Jesus Christ as Lord) with other believers or those outside the church. There is much shouting with plenty of heat and not much light. This book will give you practical lessons to apply to your own life and even more encouragement as you take the time to do so.

Written in the author's thoughtful style and reflective of his humble spirit, your take away will be a renewed willingness to listen in the manner of the hope you claim. You will respectfully find truth that God is ready to offer you through others. Most importantly, your desire to "win" through the imposition of your will (not God's) on others will diminish.

I recommend this read to you as a modest step that permits you to move the world toward civil engagement while being faithful to Jesus' claim on your life.