Today, on NPR, a woman from Ohio identified herself as a "culture warrior". "We are involved today", she said, "in a culture war. One the one side are the progressives. On the other side are we traditionalists. We must fight to preserve our traditional values."
Her remarks provoked many thoughts and feelings.
Initially, I felt sadness. How unfortunate in 2007, living in a country and land with so much, to perceive one's self at "war". A war that is far more deadly than what we are fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. One of the gifts of our heritage is the freedom to create a civilization in which different cultures may live together side-by-side, with no one having to fear that her/his will be destroyed by another.
Being a lover of words, my next thought was to wonder how she might define "traditional" and "progressive". If one if not "progressive" is s/he "regressive"? "Stagnant". Can one be "traditional" and still move forward into this 21st century without needing to sacrifice "values"?
What is a "progressive" value? Is it new? Is it a 'traditional' value that has matured or evolved so as to incorporate the changes of living?
Were the values proclaimed by Jesus "traditional" or "progressive"? There is no question as to how the religious rulers would answer that.
I would love to engage in discussion with that woman in Ohio, and her many like-minded friends across our nation. A discussion that, hopefully, would not make her [them] feel at war [i.e. defensive] but as co-seekers hoping to proclaim the same values without needing to fight over externals. I have done that with Amish, neither seeking to make them dress like myself or use modern machinery. It should be easier to have dialogue with her [them].
Such a dialogue is far more important - and urgent - today than wondering which candidates will win in Iowa or New Hampshire. If we do not regain an ability to move forward as a unified nation, then the winner in November 2008 is irrelevant.
-
