The Prime Minister of Peace in his dealings with the leader of the opposition, whoever he happened to be at the time, set a very high bar of decorum for his ministers to follow. In the scriptures, the number 12 is the number of government and Jesus as chief minister modelled the standard he laid down for all his followers that later would be codified by Jude (8 & 9) in his admonition to give the devil the dignity due him.
Whether the opposition came from within, as with the dissident Judas; or without, as demonstrated at his arrest by Roman forces, His recognition that all humans are worthy of basic respect, regardless of which party they belong to, or which path they follow, characterized the general disposition of the Leader throughout the entire period of his earthly administration.
The single occasion on which Jesus was recorded to have lost his temper was not during a sitting of Parliament, but in dealing with rebels caught in the act of criminality withn the bounds of his own jurisdiction. It was His father’s house, they were thieves, and in stark violation of the statutes and protocols of the House. The whip was as appropriate as would a shotgun be for modern intruders and trespassers.
Politics and law are certainly no dolly house. Life or death, prosperity or chaos, Justice or oppression hang in the balance. It indeed is sometimes necessary to expose the agendas of those with evil intent and, while that may look like public name calling and finger pointing, the fact that Jesus could break bread with integrity with those whom he had just recently strenuously and publicly rebuked, indicated his priority of doing all in the public interest, willing to entertain any party, though beholden to none.
While the principle of common respect for all, both those in authority, as well as those under their jurisdiction is essentially correct and ideal, if not necessary, for proper order and function; nevertheless, it is either naïve or imperious to lay that burden on the bottom of the pyramid, if the top is not, like Jesus, setting the example.
There is then a challenge to politicians whose public service should naturally attract the respect of the people who ostensibly are its beneficiaries. Respecting each the other, demonstrates not only respect for self, but also for the common office all share. But regardless of entreaty to the contrary, politicians who contemn the people will be contemned by the people.
The same challenge is issued at the church whose leaders within the Jamaican context have been equally renowned for past and present petty bickering, name calling and collegial character assassination.
When Jamaican leaders once again model ‘ true respect for all‘ as did founding fathers Norman Manley and Alexander Bustamante, men of different strengths and suasions, bonded by family ties and a common love for the people; which we are yet to learn, regardless of the many platitudinous repetitions of our anthem, then perhaps the sovereign people, yet to appreciate their sovereignty in full , may eventually rise from the ashes of deep seated distrust and disdain for the necessary role of government that was bitterly sewn into our psyche in former times and embrace the golden opportunity of the present – to make up for over 200 years of lost sovereignty had we been able to unite in a common enterprise as Whites did in the USA or Blacks in Haiti not long after that. What remains to be seen is a United Church of Blacks and Whites and every ethnicity taking the government upon its shoulders in service of the people and not of itself, as with past religious empires.
Perhaps the first truly Christian Democracy is yet to be seen.
YeKengalé 