Civility and Chuck Colson

2012-04-13Yesterday, Mary DeMuth wrote a loving tribute to her friend and mentor Charles W. “Chuck” Colson. Many people in my generation remember Colson as a Special Counsel to President Richard M. Nixon; as a man who pled guilty to obstruction of justice and then went to prison for his role in Watergate.

Few of us know the Colson about whom DeMuth writes; the man who converted to Christianity in 1973 and has spent the past 39 years doing his best to live his Christian faith; the man who has voluntarily spent the past 30+ Easters in prison doing prison ministry. Sadly, Colson was not in prison for Easter 2012 because he lay in critical condition in a hospital bed recovering from surgery for an intracerebral hemorrhage.

Regardless of what we might think of Colson’s past politics or current theology, we should have compassion for a man who is in ill health. Yet, in “People Will Hate You if You Love Jesus,” Demuth cites some vicious comments made at the end of a CNN article about Colson’s medical condition:

  • From “Satan” Hey Chuck! Drop on by whenever you are ready. I’ve got the jaws of hell wide open for you.
  • From Howlyn: Chuck Colson: you are a corrupt piece of garbage.
  • From Camel: When he dies, I wonder if the very rich Colson will have to try to pass through the eye of a needle before the let him in heaven.
  • From Charles: What a crappy article about a rancid sack of garbage no one cares about. Too bad the surgery worked.
  • From J.W.: He has ugly lips.

Unfortunately, because the lack of civility in contemporary American society is so appalling, Demuth could just have easily titled her article “People Will Hate You if You Simply Disagree with Them.” Fortunately, lessons concerning civility are easily incorporated into our classrooms.

The day before DeMuth wrote her tribute to Colson and made her comments about incivility, I taught “The Meaning of Truth,” a lecture by Colson in which he presents four criteria for determining “Truth.” Because he uses the type of Biblical references we should expect from him as he addresses a Christian audience, some students object to his presentation.

When we discuss the video, I do not permit ad hominem attacks against Colson and insist that he is given the respect to which any serious scholar is entitled. If, for example, students believe that Colson’s position on homosexuality—a topic on which he expounds during his lecture—is wrong; I challenge them to explain how they know their beliefs about homosexuality are true. Often, I catch students taking the same type of myopic approach to their arguments that they accuse Colson of making. I then challenge them on their blind faith and narrow points of view.

Because Colson is so confident in his beliefs and articulates his arguments so well, I find that using his materials to be very helpful in my attempts to transform students into critical thinkers . However, I am no fan of Colson. When I teach a follow-up lecture he gives in the same series in which “What is Truth?” is found, I am very critical of his poor understanding of Eastern thought and the way he presents1 certain non-Christian theologies. Yet, as I challenge his examples, I remain civil and respectful; something that I believe we are all called to do.

Modeling civility in our classrooms, in our interactions with students and colleagues, and in our personal lives, we do more to promote a civil society than we do when we denigrate someone with whom we disagree—even if that someone is consigning us to Hell. I take no joy in Chuck Colson’s medical problems and my heart goes out to him, to his family, and to the people whom he has encouraged to be better human beings.

–Steven L. Berg, PhD

1At approximately 10:30am on April 14, I changed “misrepresents” to “presents.” My original word choice implies that I believe that Mr. Colson is being deceitful; something I do not believe. Instead, I believe that his error is a result of misunderstanding and that there is no ill intent on his part. I realized my error when I received a note from Dr. Gelnn S. Sunshine which read, in part, “In terms of his understanding of Eastern religion, he is still learning–another thing I appreciate about him. He’s considered by many to be an expert on a lot of different things, including worldview, yet he knows his limits and asks for corrections in his thinking and incorporates them into his presentations when he knows he’s on shaky ground. I don’t know many people at his level of influence who do that.”

Creative Commons License

Posted on by Steven L. Berg
Categories: karuna [compassion], pedagogy
Tags: , , , ,

10 Responses

  1. What’s in a Word? says:
    24 November 2012 at 5:24 pm

    […] publishing “Civility and Chuck Colson,” I received a message from Dr. Glenn S. Sunshine concerning a section in which I was critical of […]

    Reply
  2. The Rev. David Grant Smith says:
    28 April 2012 at 11:39 am

    I regret not having had the opportunity to read this before now. Well said!

    Civility is such an important aspect of interpersonal/human discourse. And, in my opinion, it is deplorably lacking in our society. I can’t speak for other societies and cultures, and I don’t wish to excuse the lack of civility in our context. But I do have a theory about it. We as a people in the U.S. of A. have only been a nation for slightly more than 225 years. Compared to the length of other national identities around the globe, we are adolescents. And it is my thesis that we as a nation are still struggling for a national identity. Part of the adolescent struggle for identity is spent in rude, dismissive, and uncivil behavior towards others, and an insistence that there simply isn’t any other way of doing/being than the way we want to do/be. When we notice this behavior in younger members of our families and communities (especially when the lack of civility is directed toward *us*), we take corrective actions: we scold, offer better examples, hold up higher standards, and encourage youngsters to live into doing/being better than the behavior they are displaying. However, in terms of our present struggle for national identity, we as a society are running unchecked. Few are the other global contexts and societies that are willing to challenge our behaviors into being more cooperative, respectful, and civil. And – again, in my opinion – this unchallenged level of national behavior has become a model for how all of its citizens are to behave.

    Having said all this, I want to express my profound gratitude for the fact that there are those who, like Professor Berg, are trying to teach the pursuit of civility along with the pursuit of academic excellence. I, too, am not a fan of the theological/political positions of Mr. Colson – or any number of others who espouse his (or similar) ideals. But I do my best to always wish people well, to offer them no harm, and to offer them the dignity and respect which is due to every human being. And if we can agree to disagree, perhaps that can become the common ground on which we can stand to begin to first understand one another, work toward our mutual benefit, and (perhaps) come to new understandings because of the respect which we learn to hold for one another. Trashing one another does nothing to improve anything or anyone; it only makes life messier, more painful, and less satisfying.

    Reply
  3. What’s in a Word? « Microblog says:
    15 April 2012 at 10:11 pm

    […] publishing “Civility and Chuck Colson,” I received a message from Dr. Glenn S. Sunshine concerning a section in which I was […]

    Reply
  4. Sam Hays says:
    15 April 2012 at 5:47 am

    The following approach of Stephen Prothero of Boston University might help in the quest for civility and respect in the face of religion. .

    “Different religions are responding to different problems, says Prothero, and therefore each religion offers a different solution. For example, Christians identify the problem as sin, and the solution is salvation; for Buddhists, however, the problem is suffering and the solution is nirvana. In addition, each religion has different techniques for moving from problem to solution, and different exemplars who show us how to get to the solution. Christians use the techniques of faith and good works, and Christian exemplars are saints or ordinary people of faith. But Buddhists use the techniques of the Eightfold Path, and their exemplars are arhats, bodhisattvas, or lamas…—a problem, a solution, techniques, and exemplars.”

    Each religion articulates:

    a problem: an explanation of what is wrong with the world
    a solution: the religion’s goal
    a technique (or techniques): things that have to be done from moving from this problem to this solution
    an exemplar (or exemplars) who chart this path from problem to solution
    1 – Islam (The Way of Submission) – the problem is self-sufficiency, the solution is submission, the technique is performing the religion (the Five Pillars etc.)

    2 – Christianity (The Way of Salvation)- the problem is sin, the solution is salvation in Jesus Christ, the technique is some combination of faith and good works.

    3 – Confucianism (The Way of Propriety) – the problem is chaos, the solution is social order, the techniques are ritual and etiquette.

    4 – Hinduism (The Way of Devotion) – the problem is samsara (cycle of death and rebirth), the solution is moksha (release) and the technique is devotion.

    5 – Buddhism (The Way of Awakening) – the problem is suffering, the solution is nirvana, the technique is the Eightfold Path.

    6 – Yoruba Religion (The Way of Connection) – the problem is disconnection, the solution is reconnection to the divine, the technique is divination and sacrifice.

    7 – Judaism (The Way of Exile and Return) – the problem is exile, the solution is return, the technique is remembering and obeying.

    8 – Daoism (The Way of Flourishing) – the problem is lifelessness, the solution is flourishing, the technique is the Dao

    Reply
  5. christa says:
    14 April 2012 at 4:02 pm

    I enjoyed this piece Steve-well done.

    Reply
  6. Dan says:
    14 April 2012 at 8:54 am

    Sounds like you have come up short on your goal Sam.

    Reply
  7. Sam Hays says:
    13 April 2012 at 10:51 pm

    I find that my respect for others has its limits. I can follow your position on Colson. But I stop myself when it comes to Dick Cheny I regret that his recent transplant surgery was successful, for he is still alive to do more damage. My willing that hard atitude towards Cheny is an act of hubris. For I inflate my importance. The goal is to seek to have no self-importance, to have no will. In Christian terms, it is the knosis of Philippian 2:5-11 in which I am called to have the mind of Christ who emptied himself and took on the form of a servant. My boundaries of judgment and self-importance must be erased. Even the “I” must be erased.

    Reply

LEAVE A COMMENT