EMPOWERING EACH OTHER BY EMPATHY AND RESPONSABILITY
Response to the lecture given by Professor Ernst Hirsch Ballin
University of Tilburg, 21. II. 2013
Jürgen Mettepenningen, advisor CEDER (CD&V, Flanders), theologian KU Leuven
“You are the light of the world. A city located on a hill can’t be hidden. No
one lights a lamp and put it under a bushel but on a lampstand, and it
gives light to everyone in the house” (Mat. 5:14-15)
Having read the lecture by Professor Ballin, I noted a quotation from the Sermon on
the Mount, put at the head of the text: “You are the salt of the earth. But if the
salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again?” (Mat. 5:13). In his
lecture, Professor Ballin made it clear why he chose this quotation. I like what he
said about respect, compassion, and hope; and I would like to thank Professor Ballin
for sharing his wisdom, in a lecture which I appreciated a lot.
As a respondent, of course, the organizers of this colloquium expect me to
respond; and they clearly expect a response, from the perspective of Christiandemocracy, particularly Christian-Democracy in Flanders. However, next to the fact
that I am an advisor within the study center of CD&V, I am also – in fact in the first
place du to my Ph.D. – a theologian. Please allow me, then, to speak from the
perspective of both perspectives. These are two significant and, to a degree,
complementary viewpoints, certainly when the topic is “Christianity and the Future of
Christian Democracy”.
The advisor/theologian complementarity compels me to begin my response
with the verse which immediately follows the verse about being the salt of the earth:
“You are the light of the world. A city located on a hill can’t be hidden. No
one lights a lamp and put it under a bushel but on a lampstand, and it
gives light to everyone in the house”.
1
To be salt for politics cannot happen in an invisible and hidden way. No political party
wants to put its own viewpoint, proposals and opinions under a bushel. Or, to phrase
it another way: every political party is called to put its light on a lamp stand. That
light of course must be more than just a collection of opinions and proposals. It must
reflect underlying convictions, a political philosophy. And what is our light? Our
philosophy?
In what follows, respecting our limited time, I would like to share three
observations about our light, the house it enlightens, and how it happens.
1. What light are we talking about here?
The Christian Democratic light, of course! And then the question arises: what do we
mean by Christian-Democracy? What is Christian-Democracy? What is its identity?
How does its light differ from other lights? It is the question about its nature.
Professor Ballin has certainly formulated a number of important
considerations about Christian-Democracy. Reflecting on the wisdom he has shared
with us, however, I still think that a complete answer cannot be fully given due to
the nature of politics itself, which implies that one cannot fully grasp the identity of
Christian Democratic without taking the concrete context into account too, something
I will discuss in the second point. At this moment, I leave in a way the context a
while aside, to discuss the question: which light are we discussing here? The notion
of identity is at the center of the debate. Professor Ballin talks about it several times:
he speaks about the “Christian Democratic identity” and, in another place, about “the
political identity of a Christian Democratic political party”. In yet another place,
when speaking about the Dutch context, he mentioned “the identity as Christian
Democrats” and he even seemed to moan a bit.
It seems quite clear to me that the identity of the Christian-Democratic light
cannot be summarized in one or two sentences for it has to do with its roots, with its
values, with the laws and habits appropriate to politics, and with the words and
deeds of the representatives of Christian-Democratic parties worldwide – each in its
own particular context. Let us think about some of these elements which are
constitutive for Christian-Democratic identity. First of all, in every context, it is
important to refer to the roots. Also in Flanders, where we recall our roots in the
program outlined at the establishment of the party in 1945, the so-called ‘Christmas
2
Program’, ‘het Kerstprogramma’. It states that “the party is Christian because it
wants to build on the platform of human values which founded our Western
civilization. From an historical perspective, they were transmitted to us by
Christianity. However, those values are currently common to everyone, believers and
non-believers”.
When it comes down to these values, we are always talking about issues
relating to personalism, responsibility, respect, solidarity, subsidiarity, and
sustainability. Within every context these values need to be represented and
concretized into proposals, new laws or updated laws, shaped by politicians who are
connected to many people. But is this Christian-Democracy? I think ‘yes’ with my
intellect; but I don’t feel much ‘yes’ in my heart. Very honestly, politics must be felt
in the heart as well. For me this is quite evident from an integral-personalistic point
of view. In other words: next to the pragmatic aspect of politics, there is the aspect
of inspiration: the very soul of political vision, opinion, government, and opposition.
Let me be a bit provocative. Don’t we at times avoid explicitly mentioning our
roots? Yes, of course, we are Christian-Democrats; but we often stress the word
‘Democrat’ and we like to leave the term ‘Christian’ as vague as possible. If people
do ask what the ‘C’, mentioned in our party’s name, signifies, we quickly refer to it as
an important source of the values we are promoting, and that’s it. On to the next
question….
Sorry – and you are probably thinking: well the theologian is speaking now –
but I go on to be a step further in being provocative: if the ‘C’ of ChristianDemocracy only refers to values and not also to Christ, the cornerstone of
Christianity and of the word ‘Christian’, and if Christ is the big name you never
pronounce, then it would be better to delete the ‘C’ because, in that case, the ‘C’ is
reduced to a purely historical reference in footnotes and to a mirror of values. Does
this mean for me that the name of Jesus needs to be mentioned more in politics? No,
but I think in the bosom of a Christian-Democratic party, in talks and reflections, his
name should not be absent. On the contrary. In his lecture, Professor Ballin speaks
about the Sermon on the Mount and about the story of the Good Samaritan. Very
nice, and I am very happy that he mentions these very rich stories; and I am also
happy that he puts the salt-quotation at the beginning of his lecture. Nevertheless,
even in a colloquium on “Christianity and the Future of Christian Democracy”, a title
in which the word Christian appears twice, Professor Ballin’s lecture lacks the name
3
of Christ. I don’t mean this as any kind of an attack – a colloquium is no place for
attacks – but as a fact which I critically observe.
Have we, as Christian-Democrats, so greatly assimilated secular society that
we don’t want to pronounce the name of Jesus Christ anymore? In the name of
values?! In other words, are we not putting an important source of inspiration and
consciousness under the bushel? Salting politics with compassion is great, I find; but
isn’t the salt losing its saltiness, if we don’t dare anymore to give the power of the
salt a name? In my eyes, the name of Jesus Christ belongs to the identity of
Christian-Democrats, whether they believe or not. The latter seems to be a
contradiction, but that’s not the case: Jesus is the image of God for those who
confess this in their creed; but he is first and foremost the example to follow, to
imitate. In short: in politics, the imitatio Christi doesn’t need to imply, in a way, the
confession of Jesus as imago Dei.
2. In which house does Christian-Democracy need to give light?
Before answering this question, let me state that Christian-Democracy in a way
doesn’t exist. I mean this: from the perspective of its own identity, and belonging to
its identity, Christian-Democracy always is ‘applied Christian-Democracy’. There is a
Sitz im Leben – Christian-Democracy is situated. Precisely this social, cultural,
religious, and political context is the house in which the lamp gives light or needs to
give light. The quotation of both salt, therefore, inspires me to state that the salt is
meant for ‘the earth’ as a whole – for “all that are in the house”. This is exactly what
makes a Christian-Democratic party a party for all the people, for everybody in the
house. What we call in Dutch ‘een volkspartij’,’ something Professor Ballin has
considered very well too in his lecture. About such a people’s party one can say a lot,
of course. And there are several possibilities to give the term content. Let me be
clear: even if one has the majority of the votes, this does not mean that one is a
people’s party (‘een volkspartij’). And even if you say most of the time what people
think or express in daily life, you are not a people’s party, but rather a populist party.
I believe that a people’s party is a term which belongs to the category of quality of
life. This implies that a people’s party shows attention for the men and women in our
contemporary culture who have neither a voice nor a face, who are not featured on
television, and who live in the margins of society, hidden, until one or another drama
or miracle happens. It is in line with the Gospel that attention for all those people
4
has as a consequence that you focus your attention on all the people. So, the light
needs to shine for all women and men who are poor and for those who are asking
for a second or third chance to build up a life in dignity. If the light shines for
everyone, it shines for everybody.
It is within this context that the notion of ‘compassion’ is so important. For
me, Jesus is the most eminent image of what compassion can be. It means for me
that Christian-Democrats are called to speak with people who are left aside by
others, that they really exert themselves for them, that they not only attend
receptions – as Jesus did as well – but that they also visit the people who are never
invited to receptions. It also means that Christian-Democrats do not make quick
judgments about people but that they go a step further: offering people chances,
beyond the judgment. Jesus and his close followers are useful and inspiring
examples. For instance, compassion always starts with attention and empathy. I am
convinced of the fact that only Christian-Democrats can reach the minds and hearts
of people – and by doing so give witness to their ambition of being a people’s party
– if they pay attention to everyone (in particular the weak) and try to do their best to
be as empathic as possible. So doing, one learns how to give compassion its most
appropriated shape, also on the level of politics. Three terms – attention, empathy,
and compassion – all focus on the other: on people’s wellbeing and welfare. Or let
me put in another way: if we would be more concerned about ourselves as ChristianDemocrats than about the other, then we are unworthy to maintain the term
‘Christian’ as part of our name. Enfin, this statement makes me express the necessity
of focusing on our core business as Christian-Democrats. In this perspective, I
greatly appreciated the ‘C-exercise’ done within CDA, published by Erik Borgman,
Pieter-Jan Dijkman and Paul Van Geest, in which the president of CD&V, Wouter
Beke, also has written a contribution.
5
3. How to put the light on a lampstand?
What I found very clear in Professor Ballin’s lecture, was the fact that ChristianDemocracy is a value-inspired way of managing democracy, not a political way of
managing religion. It belongs to the heart of Christian-democratic parties to think, to
act, and to react in a way which is faithful to its own inspiration. Among other things,
this means, therefore, that all the terms with which Christian-democracy is connected
need to be recognized in everything Christian-Democrats think, do, and don’t do.
This could probably be called the ‘Christian-Democratic check’. In my eyes this
implies that Christian-Democrats first and foremost encourage people to develop
their talents, and to encourage people to help their neighbors, employees and friends
to develop their talents. In short, to create a framework of reciprocal
encouragement, responsibility, empathy and – if necessary – help. This leads me to
the key notion of empowerment. It is not the task of politics in general and the
government in particular to be responsible for everything that happens or needs to
happen within our society. No! From a Christian-Democratic point of view the
government is called to give responsibility and confidence to organizations,
institutions, movements, and other unions where people meet each other, are
connected to each other, and make each other stronger.
Christian-Democrats aim to create a future, which means: to open the future
for everyone, in line with the capabilities of everyone, taking the concrete situation
and context of everyone into account. Moreover, empowerment is not only the task
of the government, but the responsibility and task of everyone! Therefore, it is
important, I think, to teach our children and grandchildren a spirit of empowerment.
From this perspective, education in family, school, and youth movements is so
important! Building a spirit of empowerment is creating the future.
Please allow me, to conclude my response, to refer once again to Jesus. He
didn’t visit only the poor nor only the rich, but rich and poor. Every time again, on
the street or around the table, this meeting meant enrichment for everyone: people
became stronger, found encouragement, became in a way ‘new’, and became more
human. Like Christian-Democracy, empowerment means little in the abstract – in
theory. Only ‘applied Christian-Democracy’ and ‘applied empowerment’ have
relevance. In the application, the inspiration and the soul become visible. And for
me, inspiration and application are already on the lampstand in the very name itself:
Christian-Democracy.
6