|
Mud-slinging and scandal-mongering characterized the parliamentary elections held in March 2008. Much the same thing is happening in the United States, as the primary elections reach their climax. Even worse has occurred in Kenya’s presidential elections and in Zimbabwe’s contest. Christine Rossi
In their pre-election pastoral letter, the Bishops of Malta and Gozo reminded us, amid the electoral campaign’s loud voices, that the voice of God’s Word must also be considered, if we are to be ‘faith-full’ citizens. Reflecting on the Word of God will move us to step back from the position we may have always had, to look at our country with fresh eyes, and thus to exercise our citizenship rights from a hopeful vision for the future and not out of a disillusioned or comfortable status quo. Consider how the early Church dealt with such choices. In the Book of Acts (6, 1-7), Luke writes about an election which takes place in the early Christian Community. It inspires reflection about attitudes to be nurtured in our preparation for the parliamentary election. About this time, when the number of disciples was increasing, the Hellenists made a complaint against the Hebrews: in the daily distribution, their own widows were being overlooked. So the Twelve called a full meeting of the disciples and addressed them, ‘It would not be right for us to neglect the word of God so as to give out food; you, Brothers, must select from amongst yourselves seven men of good reputation, filled with the Spirit and with wisdom to whom we can hand over this duty. We ourselves will continue to devote ourselves to prayer and the service of the word.’ The whole assembly approved of this proposal and elected [seven men]. They presented these to the apostles, and after prayer they laid their hands on them. Where are we? The passage begins with the context of the election: far from the idealized descriptions presented in previous chapters, Luke here sketched a community in a state of unrest. There was ‘murmuring’, ‘complaining’. The early Christians began identifying unmet needs in the community. The daily survival needs of Greek-speaking Jewish members of the community settled in Jerusalem were being overlooked. Now, as among the early Christians, times arise when citizens are collectively called to reflect on the real needs of the whole community: what or who still needs to be taken care of? Elections are the focal point of such times, when we identify situations of unrest needing attention. The idea of ‘faith-ful citizenship’ should help us go beyond our immediate personal needs. What’s for the weakest?  It is instructive to note that the Christians were most concerned with the poorest in their community – the Hellenist widows. To be a widow and a foreigner in another country meant great poverty. The Hellenists must have faced special economic hardships and were probably overlooked in the food distribution run by the native Jews. The voices of such people on the periphery are often silent in electoral campaigns yearning for majority votes. Whose needs do we consider when we campaign, when we vote, when we assess complex issues in the public domain? Do we consider the needs of the weakest in society or only our own? Why should we vote? The apostles react to the complaints by empowering the Hellenists to choose seven men from amongst them to carry out the service in the name of the community. In various settings I encounter many who are disillusioned with Maltese politics and who therefore decide not to vote, or to withdraw from meaningful participation in public affairs: in fact, the voter turnout last March, though still high by international standards, registered the highest number of abstentions in recent parliamentary elections. The biblical text illustrates that an election is truly a time of empowerment for the people to have their say. It would be truly unwise to leave the choice of government or of policies in the hands of those who probably do not discern their vote and their stands on public issues. Do I consider my vote as an important duty towards my country? Whom should we choose?  Having carefully discerned the needy, their needs and the appropriate response, the apostles then identified the necessary qualities of those chosen for service: ‘men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom.’ Arguably these qualities are only to be applied to those holding offices of trust within the Christian community. However, politicians are also called to be people of service; they too are elected to offices of trust within our national community; thus, they require qualities similar to those sought by the apostles. What can we do to ensure that our country’s politicians are wise and honest people, who express the fruits of the Spirit in what they do: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. (Gal 5, 22) Did I look for these qualities in the politicians for whom I voted in March? After our choice… Luke ended the passage by showing the apostles carrying out a ritual signifying a transfer of function and bestowal of power. Our duty as faithful citizens did not end on election day: we must continue to be faithful to our country and to carry out our civic duties no matter who is at the helm. Moreover, we too are called to ‘bless’ the people in government and perhaps using King Solomon’s words, offer prayer for the representatives of the people who hold public office: God of our ancestors, Lord of mercy Who by your word have made the universe And in your wisdom have fitted human beings To rule the creatures that you have made To govern the world in holiness and saving justice And in honesty of soul to dispense fair judgment, Grant me Wisdom… To help me and to toil with me And teach me what is pleasing to you; Since she knows and understands everything She will guide me prudently in my actions And will protect me with her glory. (Wisdom 9, 1-18) Christine Rossi is a graduate in theology. She works as a Lay Pastoral Assistant at the University of Malta’s Chaplaincy, and is the mother of a young child. |