This is an age in which there may be a greater amount of general goodness than the world has ever known. If we began to recite the good things people have done during recent decades and compared the conduct with that of nearly any period in history we might find this to be the best of times. We revolt against any selfish treatment of any persons by the powerful. We work at finding massive responses to the needs of the sick and aged, of the concerns of children, of the disadvantaged and distressed. The needs are enormous, but the responses, partly limited, have also been enormous. We need to acknowledge the improvements, even in the face of remaining massive problems and neglect. Media sources are not adept at reporting the positive side of the story. There may be larger improvement in respect for human rights than history has ever seen, and such respect might be seen as improvement in the tendency toward goodness among the majority in the population. The archaeologists are appalled at the number of skeletons of ancients that show physical abuse, and commonly murder. But, the good of today may not be nice.
On the personal level this goodness is more difficult to affirm, but there is an inner feeling, and some evidence, that there has been an improvement in social goodness. This is not to suggest there should be reward for goodness. To be good is something that ought to be the norm. It is, or ought to be, the expected. Here we are not so much interested in finding the improvement of secular society as in affirming improvement of those who claim to be God’s children. It seems to me that churches have millions of good people in them, and that, during my lifetime, there has been improvement in what may be called goodness factors in members that makes a difference.
But, there is also great disappointment. Too many good people seem not to be nice. This is easily shown with some good people in the secular context. Who could have guessed fifty or so years ago that perceptive people would be using low quality language, even oaths, in public situations? Who could have guessed that body functions and sexual innuendoes would become obvious in the public shows of entertainers? Who could have predicted that there would be so much name-calling; so much grossness in gestures and speech; so much churlishness in students toward their teachers and parents as well as each other? (Numberless texts from youths invite other youths to kill themselves.) In the name of casualness there has been loss of a sense of modesty; the loss of thank you; and sorry; and please; and the loss of deferring to one another. I am virtually denied the desire to hold a door for the person behind me, or to wait a moment on a street so that another car may pass. The loss of good manners goes even deeper. Persons second guess each other, and do it loudly, with some ferocity. Leaders are called names. Persons are shucked off. Vulgarity grows. Some Christians fuss in harsh ways with each other, and may shift from church to church because of some minor hurt. It becomes a scandal – enough to encourage persons to speak evil of goodness. We may wonder where failure of manners means failure of goodness. When nice slips too far, goodness fades. Following the most gracious person who ever lived, we learn something about nice related to goodness. One wishes to know, with some assurance, if we are improving our ways or simply shifting anger from one area of life to another. I lived and taught in Minnesota for nine years and remember well the common events of what we called Minnesota Nice. The State did have an attitude of warmth among persons, even special words. I moved back thirty years later. Articles are appearing asking what happened to Minnesota Nice? It remains as I experience it, but not as nice as it used to be. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020