The differing viewpoints have been simmering for months. As I look back, it seems clear that there were multiple views held at the start by the individuals around the table. While many shared a similar foundation, we seemed to struggle with the multiple realities represented. Given the intent represented by each foundation, I can see a possibility of fewer views but not one. The question I am left with is; what or who comes first?
The irony of the conversation is that once we got past the first skirmish, the visible debate stopped. It was as if someone had decided to mirror the psalm; “Someone wicked takes one look and rages, blusters away but ends up speechless. There’s nothing to the dreams of the wicked. Nothing.” (Psalm 112.10) As triumphal as this can sound, it does not mean that the disagreement has been resolved or that civility is intact.
As the next cycle of the debate returns, I am still wrestling with remnants of the first. Some of the resolutions that I carry with me include the following.
Civility takes two but starts with one. There is little point of waiting on the other for respect. When I do that, I discover that I have put my interests ahead of another. While everyone deserves respect, my role is to give respect to each and all.
Commitments can be unilateral and bilateral, one way and dependent. In my case, I made several commitments with the aspiration that it would encourage movement and build a consensus. In the end, it did not, nothing changed. What remains from that part of the conversation is just one thing, my commitment.
Civility is a process not a destination. The gaps simmering for months are still there. I am not sure anything behind the scenes has changed. I could use my experience to affirm my assumptions and bias or I can take a fresh approach.
Content helps. It helps me understand dreams, visions, and aspirations. It is a place foundation to build on when I can let go of my lingering emotions.
