How are my seniors expected to approach this year’s presidential election? This was the question I was asking myself in the fall of 2020 as I prepared to engage 20 high school students in a weeklong discussion and analysis of our election process and electoral college system. I was teaching a course that explored the political theory and everyday practice that direct daily operations of our government and shape our public policies.
Of course the fall of 2020 was a very challenging time not only in our country but in our world. The Covid-19 pandemic was raging, and our school, Fairfield College Preparatory in Connecticut, was about to begin operating on a hybrid learning schedule, with half the class participating online and half being present in person each day. Trying to engage my students in meaningful dialogue was nearly impossible, so I decided to take a more reflective approach.
I wanted to teach these young men how to listen to one another better. We would get nowhere if they were going to shut down every time they heard something they disagreed with. I relied on my training as a spiritual director to help me with this. I started with St. Ignatius Loyola and his presupposition, which urges us to be “more ready to put a good interpretation on another’s statement than to condemn it as false” (Spiritual Exercises, No.22). Given that Fairfield Prep was operating on a hybrid schedule because of the pandemic, I would pair a student who was in class in person with someone who was on Zoom. This was an attempt to make those at home feel truly part of the class discussion. I received very positive feedback from both students and parents. Students appreciated these opportunities to engage in meaningful conversation and they felt heard. Parents, some of whom listened in on their son’s conversation with classmates, reported they had heard very respectful interactions.
Using Ignatius’ presupposition as a foundation, the class engaged in small-group spiritual conversation. This meant that each student got to share their thoughts and perspective without a peer responding right away or even interrupting them. Each student had to truly listen to each member in their group. They internalized what they were hearing and then, in their later responses, shared what they had noticed to be the common movements of their small group. In the final stage of these spiritual conversations, we had some very lively but civil full class discussions.
My students’ political leanings mirrored society’s. Their political views were just as polarized. I had students who fell far to the right on the political spectrum and others who fell far to the left. I had very few students who classified themselves as independent. So when it came time to engage as a full class there was healthy debate. In particular when Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court was announced in late September 2020 less than 40 days before the election, the students discussed the pros and cons of pushing through or stalling a Supreme Court nominee, and compared the situation with Merrick Garland’s nomination in the 2016 election year.
Another resource that was helpful to me in teaching during the 2020 election cycle was “Contemplation and Political Action: An Ignatian Guide to Civic Engagement,” produced by the Jesuit Conference of the United States and Canada. As the document states in its introductory letter, “The document is a reflection of how our faith and Ignatian values might guide our pursuit of the common good in the public square.”
This document is not a voter guide; rather it looks at our shared political life through the lens of Ignatian spirituality. One question that we reflected on was “How am I called to live out my faith in public?” and “How might Ignatian spirituality and discernment guide my participation in civic life?”
We discussed what it means to be a “man for others” as it relates to civic engagement and civil discourse. Students spoke about putting the other’s feelings and perspectives before their own. We discussed how they could put their civic duty into practice even if they could not vote. Several volunteered for some of the local political campaigns, and one had an internship with a state senator.
My students talked about the pressure they felt to vote a certain way because of their parents’ political views. Many shared how much distrust there was toward the media especially as it related to their political coverage.
The History Department chair and I set up a special assignment that looked at the media coverage of the election; it continued into the first 100 days of the Biden administration. The students were asked to examine possible bias and how it shaped policy and how it related to the truth.
The students were challenged to look at the media coverage from a wide variety of sources, not just from their preferred political viewpoint. One student commented that it made him feel “uncomfortable” to view the coverage from a media source that was in opposition to his political view point. He, as well as many other students, came to the stark realization of how different a news story could be when covered by Fox News or MSNBC.
The idea of Ignatian discernment was a bit foreign to my students, so going through this process with this group of students was a worthwhile endeavor. I fully believe that the difficult decisions that our civic life calls us to make can benefit from Ignatian discernment. I could sense from my students, especially the ones who were voting for the first time in the election, that it was not going to be an easy decision.
So we discussed this aspect of Ignatian discernment, drawn from our study guide: “Real discernment requires us to nurture our relationship with Christ in that deepest part of our self.” The process of spiritual conversation helped my students hear from a wide variety of perspectives. It helped them to determine who they should be listening to and to make sure they include God in the conversation.
Now, in 2024, we are fully immersed in another contentious election cycle. In many ways this time feels even more challenging. So how are we approaching this election season here at Fairfield Prep? Each academic year we pick a theme. Our school’s theme this year is “Our Common Home.” We are engaging the theme through two pillars: “Care of Creation” and “Civil Discourse and Civic Engagement.” In preparing our students for this crucial period, It is important for us to keep in mind the framework for Ignatian spiritual conversation: Be slow to speak; listen attentively; seek the truth in what others are saying; disagree humbly and respectfully, and allow the time needed.
More than 50 years ago, in a now famous speech, Pedro Arrupe, S.J., the superior general of the Jesuits at the time, said: “Today, our prime educational objective must be to form men-for-others…men who cannot even conceive of love of God which does not include love for the least of their neighbors....”
If my students remain true to the values of our Jesuit institution, but more importantly their identities as children of God, then I believe they can handle whatever our election season may bring, and they will be able to do that with the conviction that they are being “men for others.”
