Last night the President of the United States (POTUS) delivered the State of the Union address. It is a time-honored event, first delivered by George Washington on January 8, 1790.

Tuesday night’s speech was not the first State of the Union delivered in trying times. Nor was its partisanship noteworthy. After all, POTUS is a politician, speaking before a room full of politicians, to an audience he hopes will reelect him (or his chosen successor).

But before this speech transpired it was mired in divisiveness. When it occurred, it was derided as divisive, and before POTUS left the lectern, his speech was literally torn asunder by the Speaker of the House.

We are a house divided—which is different than a house with competing agendas.

There was a time when we debated issues, realizing that reasoned argument led to cohesive conclusions. The jousting of concepts occurred on level ground, with mutual respect, in civil discourse.

Our house was not divided when President Trump was elected in 2016. A nation is not divided over night. It is separated over time as fissures breach and split.

A society is complex. Was it the liberalization of the universities that broke us apart? Was it the failure to respect history that did this to us? Was it Bush’s wars? The excesses of the Boomers? The falling birth rates of WASPs? Immigration? Obama? Trump? Was it an issue? Women’s rights, black’s rights, LGBTQ rights; election fraud, voting rights; abortion, the climate, nuclear arms, the South China Sea?

Only a controversy makes for a good story and there was nothing controversial in what Ms. Clinton said.

To attribute our division to Donald J. Trump is simplistic. It is societal denial and irresponsibility. America did not get where we are in three years. This POTUS might be the straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back, but it is Pollyannaish to blame POTUS for decades of societal irresponsibility and governmental ineptitude.

However, the election of Donald Trump as POTUS wiped the fog off society’s looking glass. Hillary Clinton was the first to say what she saw when she referred to those who voted for Trump as “deplorable.”

In retrospect, the opposing sides of America had long thought their counterparts were deplorable. They’d just not declared it from a national stage.

Ms. Clinton’s pronouncement stunned me. I thought, Oh, my gosh. This woman is going to be crucified for saying that. But, nothing happened. Neither side of the divide made her statement newsworthy. It took me a while to digest what occurred.

Ms. Clinton spoke the truth. The truth is not newsworthy. Only a controversy makes for a good story and there was nothing controversial in what Ms. Clinton said.

Ms. Clinton pronounced what is: Our societal discourse is no longer civil. Our debate is not about ideas, but about right and wrong. There is no longer middle ground. If you see things differently, you are deplorable.

Mutual respect—the quality essential to getting along—is lost.

The alternative, which some advocate, is trashing America as we know it and starting over with a system to be determined.

Professor Michael Lind of the University of Texas asserts that over the past half century, institutions like churches, unions, and civic organizations, which helped mediate society, have eroded, leaving everyone polarized, angry, and worse off (“Texas Monthly”). For all the complexity of what ails our society, Professor Lind is spot on.

Pick up whatever source you wish to reference and the assessment is we are disaffected, dis-bonded, and disconnected even though we live in a perpetual state of electronic connectivity. The societal institutions that mediated society have abdicated, been dismantled, are discredited as irrelevant.

I have no plan in mind for resurrecting the mediating influences in society. I’m writing, 1) to offer an assessment of our society and Western democracy, and 2) to pose action steps for us who are, a) followers of Jesus Christ and b) those who consider our societal beliefs anchored in the Judeo-Christian traditions. Why these two things? 1) Because we cannot solve a problem that we do not name and look square in the eye, and 2) since biblical principles guided the founding fathers, they are the only reasonable chance of identifying common ground upon which mutual respect might once again flourish. The alternative, which some advocate, is trashing America as we know it and starting over with a system to be determined.

While the American Constitution is guided by biblical principle, as Christians we should not use the Bible’s teaching to advance a governmental preference as if to establish either heaven on Earth or the notion of a Christian government. Christian leaders who endorse political figures are, first, breaking the law according to IRS rules governing nonprofit entities. Second, they are endorsing their political persuasion as Christian (and anything opposing as unchristian). And third, their endorsement suggests their candidate is God’s candidate and that their political conviction will render a biblical government.

Although the US Constitution was formed upon biblical principles, there are followers of Jesus Christ located in every country on the planet. It’s lunacy to think that American government is Christian and thus all others are not.

Don’t ever lose sight of this: God reigns in hearts, not governments.

Still, Christians are members of society. The Bible does not endorse American government, but the Bible has plenty to say about how Christians conduct themselves as members of societies governed by any form of government in existence.

Spoiler alert: It cost him his life.

First, Scripture states that all authority is established by God: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except by God, and those that exist are put in place by God. So then, the one who resists authority resists the ordinance which is from God, and those who resist will receive condemnation on themselves” (Romans 13:1-2, LEB).

No sooner do we read this passage than the “what about” questions surface. What about Christians in North Korea, or China, or Iran—as if biblical statement is applicable to some and irrelevant to others? The government of Rome was not exactly welcoming to Christians when Paul penned Chapter 13. Just because Romans 13 is difficult to apply doesn’t mean its meaning is negotiable.

You could also ask, What about the Christian living in Colonial America who got word that the government had denounced the King and declared independence? What do you do if General Washington conscripts you to fight against the English government? Reconciling Romans 13 is tough sledding.  

Or, you are a Christian living in Germany in 1935 and must reconcile Romans 13 with the government of Adolph Hitler. On this, we have the thinking of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Spoiler alert: It cost him his life.  

As a Christian, you are instructed to pay taxes and to pray for those in authority. If you fail to pay your taxes, you not only go to prison, you also sin by biblical standards.

If you are a political conservative and fail(ed) to pray for President Obama, Secretary Hillary Clinton, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, then biblically you fail(ed) as a Christian. If you are a political liberal and fail to pray for President Donald Trump, Senator Ted Cruz, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, you fail in your Christian responsibility.

The biblical standard is not difficult to grasp. Application is brutal. It’s easier to throw Speaker Pelosi under the bus while drinking bourbon with your buds than it is to lift her up to the Almighty while alone on your knees.

Life within society is not easy. There are few easy solutions.

If we are to love our neighbor like we love ourselves, then it is essential that we love ourselves properly.

As followers of Jesus Christ, our home is not here. Our true home is in heaven. As long as we are here, we are told to be salt and light, seasoning society and enlightening society about what truly matters (Matthew 5:13-16).

Second, we are called to respect all people. All of us are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). Every one of us is passing through life, an image-bearer of our Creator, occupying a period of seventy-or-so years, on our way to eternity. Yes, we engage in society, but society and government come and go upon the whims of politician’s ability (and duplicity) to stay in power. Life is eternal.

Stop embracing the divisiveness of society as though it is eternal. It is important that we engage, but if engagement advances divisiveness, polarization, and disrespect, then resist. Revert to a higher standard.

But how? “They” are being so ugly.

Little things are meaningful. I learned from reading the “New York Times” that it is respectful to always refer to people—whether opponent, tyrant, or favorite—by their titles. Earlier, I referenced Ms. Clinton, Professor Lind, President Trump. Regardless of who I’m talking with, I try to always use titles for those being discussed.

Why? Because the title leaves the person in tact and me free to consider the person’s policy.

That Ms. Clinton called all those who voted for Trump “deplorable” leaves the deplorables no room to navigate, no room to negotiate, no room for discussion. If you are deplorable, you are without respect. So, what do you do? You either change the conversation or you find a more hateful word to stay in the argument.

Third, respect is primarily about listening. God gave us one mouth and two ears, indicating we should listen twice as much as we speak.

Listening is active: Tell me more about that, please. I hear you saying. How does that make you feel? How did you come to this conviction? Help me understand.

People who are listened to are being told they matter and their perspectives have value. Once they feel established, they are more likely to reach out.

Fourth, the Bible calls upon us to be people who love. The most famous passage quotes Jesus saying, “Love your neighbor as you love yourself” (Matthew 22:36-39).

If we are to love our neighbor like we love ourselves, then it is essential that we love ourselves properly before we export our self-love to the people next door.

We could produce a library on love, but the essential truth to know is that you are a loved person because God declares you loved. You are not loved because your spouse loves you, your kids love you, or your mother loves you. All of these folks can go away. God knows, and I hope you know, being loved is far too important to entrust it to a human being. Your core conviction of love must be rooted in what God says about you.

With this foundation, you are now secure and confident to love another unconditionally, i.e. with no thought of return. This concept of unconditional love-in-action is the beginning point for how you live above society’s fray, frazzle, and flippant petulance. If love is unconditional, then you can sincerely pray for those who mistreat you, misrepresent you, and malign you, let alone those who vote for the other candidate.

When a conversation turns south, I adjust the trajectory of conversation, not back to my opinion, but toward my respect for the person with whom I’m talking. The segue is not always graceful, but even if it is a yank on the linguistic reins, who doesn’t like to talk about themselves?

Another powerful simplicity is touch. I used to meet with a group of atheists and agnostics on Friday evenings after work. I always made a point of touching each person at the table: a handshake, a touch on the shoulder, etc. They were suspicious of me, but you don’t touch people who are your enemies.

I wrote recently about quitting our talk. No one is listening (except for you). Politics is enticing to talk about, but if no one is listening, talking about it is not productive.

This leaves us two options, neither of which is exclusive of the other: 1) Change the topic from what divides to what unites us. In so doing, you plow fertile ground for respect to take root. In society’s current climate, this is difficult. Everything is volatile. We must try. The alternative is horrific, i.e. 1850-1867, America’s Civil War. 2) Live a life filled with respect, listening, and love. Don’t talk about it. Do it.

I’ve learned that things don’t always work like I want them to. I’m a determined, shrewd business guy. I like success, efficiency, effectiveness, and excellence. I like to be in charge. But sometimes, I’m not, and sometimes, I’ve learned I never will be.

At the end of the day, when I sit on my patio, or walk my neighborhood in the dark, or put my head on my pillow, the only thing I can reliably manage is that I have as few regrets as possible to digest. It’s another way of saying that I try to live a personally responsible life. As a Christian, the standards for doing this are clear.

So while I may be determined and calculating, I must be a man of love, dedicated to respect for all men, who listens to others because he’s secure enough in himself (through Christ) that he can do so. Most of all, I must be a man of prayer, for myself first, my neighbor next, and then for those in positions of power. In the end, all of us report to God.  

Each week, I post short articles on life and love. Occasionally, like this article, I post more developed articles on life and leadership. I would be honored if you would subscribe here.