The power of words has become more and more clear. Whether it\u2019s starting a podcast or a blog, or having an X (when can we stop saying \u201cformerly known as twitter\u201d?), Instagram, or TikTok account, everyone has access to some platform for getting their words, thoughts, and paradigms out to the masses. The influence of words, then, is pervasive.<\/p>\n
In Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture<\/em>, Matthew Petrusek leans on the power of reasoning and words to argue that Catholic social thought would be a more fulfilling alternative to the prevailing political ideologies that govern our society and culture. At the heart, Petrusek contends that religion belongs in political and social conversations. Contrary to popular belief, faith does not contradict reason but is rather suprarational in that it goes beyond \u201cthe ordinary powers of observation, experimentation, hypothesis formation, or rational reflection\u201d[1]<\/a> \u00a0The transcendence of faith from the rational is what he believes makes faith a viable and better alternative to secular and political ideologies. While he acknowledges that disagreement with his position is likely, he welcomes it as the only way for reaching what he calls \u201ca durable agreement\u201d[2]<\/a><\/p>\n I appreciated Petrusek\u2019s call to engage in the politicized culture. If popular discourse seems to be increasingly centered around morality, human flourishing, and community well-being, there should be a correlating increase in opportunities to talk about the gospel and what I would call kingdom ethics. I wonder, however, if there is a better avenue for engaging than rhetoric. Petrusek makes clear that the goal is to \u201cwin\u201d the arguments that he encourages us to start.[3]<\/a> But how effective is that? If we are intolerant about tolerance, as Petrusek suggests we should be[4]<\/a>, how can we meaningfully engage and spend time with those who are different than we are? And if we aren\u2019t in community with those who are different than we are, how can we learn and grow?<\/p>\n The problem with relying on rhetoric along with the unwillingness to live in the tension of unresolved disagreement is that we end up becoming further entrenched in our long held beliefs. One particularly visible illustration of this is the echo chamber effect that social media has. This effect shows that online, users trend toward interacting with like-minded peers, thus validating and further encouraging the beliefs that one already held.[5]<\/a><\/p>\n I imagine Petrusek would agree, but action is more important than rhetoric[6]<\/a>. In Jesus\u2019 woes to the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23, he says as much, warning against those who \u201cpreach, but do not practice\u201d[7]<\/a>. Similarly, there is a Chinese proverb that roughly translates \u201ctalk doesn\u2019t cook rice\u201d. Without action, talk is meaningless.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Matthew Petrusek, Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to Political Culture<\/em> (Park Ridge, IL, 2023), 22.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Ibid, 21.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Ibid, 28.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Ibid, 28.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Matteo Cinelli, Gianmarco De Francisci Morales, Alessandro Galeazzi, Walter Quattrociocchi, and Michele Starnini, \u201cThe Echo Chamber Effect on Social Media,\u201d Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America<\/em> 118, no.9 (February 2021), https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1073\/pnas.2023301118<\/a>.<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Matthew K. Nock, \u201cActions Speak Louder than Words: An Elaborated Theoretical Model of the Social Functions of Self-Injury and Other Harmful Behaviors,\u201d Applied and Preventive Psychology<\/em> 12, no.4 (October 2008):159-168, https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.appsy.2008.05.002<\/a>.<\/p>\n