Few things in my faith have challenged me more than the directive to “love your enemies.”
But you don’t need to be a Christian or even religious to wrestle with this radical teaching from Jesus Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.
Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you.”
That’s a big ask. Adhering to this teaching, though, is necessary for a free and pluralistic society to endure. Failing to practice it amplifies the animosities that push communities toward collapse or decay. “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” said Abraham Lincoln as a candidate for the Senate. While we may not like it, many people we label as “enemies” are fellow Americans who share the same house.
In 2020, social scientist Arthur Brooks delivered the keynote address for the National Prayer Breakfast on this very point. He identified a “crisis of contempt” – the widespread belief that others are worthless and deserving of scorn – as our country’s greatest challenge. “Be missionaries for love in the face of contempt” was Brooks’ antidote.
Sadly the “crisis of contempt” that Brooks noted continues today. A new Pew Research study reveals that the United States is the only one of 25 countries surveyed where most view fellow citizens as morally bad. Over the past decade, similar Pew studies have tracked how Republicans and Democrats increasingly believe that members of the opposing party are immoral, closed-minded, dishonest, and unintelligent.
This toxic polarization isn’t healthy for our nation. It can inspire shocking political violence like the 2025 shootings of Minnesota lawmakers and their spouses, the murder of Charlie Kirk, and the attempted assassination of Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro and his family. This moment demands more missionaries for love.
The connections between loving others, resisting contempt, and maintaining our democratic republic were inspirations for writing, We the People: Pluralism in Real Life, a new George W. Bush Institute toolkit for working across differences. As the Pew research indicates, we need to be better at making these connections.
But what does it mean to “love” someone, particularly if you consider them an enemy? The 13th century saint Thomas Aquinas defined it as willing the good of the other. This is a useful definition for how to love fellow Americans. We help each other to live good lives – even when there’s friction.
The first habit we share in our pluralism toolkit explains that one must build a foundation for respectful engagement with others. The concrete of that foundation is recognizing every person’s innate human dignity. This is how we start loving fellow citizens – enemies too – and strengthen America’s national cohesion.
That’s because pluralism works best when people have a shared mission, challenge, or cause that diverse and competing groups can rally around. That “thing” becomes pluralism’s animating North Star; it answers “why” we do something together.
These north stars can be just about anything and might shift frequently depending upon the situation, issue, or actors involved. A notable exception to that fluidity, however, is the recognition of human dignity in others. That’s fixed because it applies to all people at all times. At the most basic level, it explains why we share the same house that President Lincoln described as being unable to stand if divided.
No matter what seemingly irreconcilable differences Americans have, they should be bound by the shared belief that every person has value because of their innate dignity – including enemies. That makes them worthy of basic levels of respect, as well as the extension of rights and liberties.
But doing so isn’t always warm and fuzzy. The path of love shouldn’t be reduced to merely treating others with kindness or providing affirmation. Sometimes, it leads to intense disagreements and arguments. Nor should loving others exclude the pursuit of justice and consequences. But it always leaves the door open to grace and redemption.
Alternatively, when engagement is based on contempt, it creates excuses to view others as less than human. It’s then easier to label them as “evil” because of their beliefs or associations. Once that happens, any engagement on any issue becomes a compromise with evil – which makes working or living together nearly impossible.
That’s why loving enemies is the hard, but necessary work of patriots who love their country. To repeat Brooks’ charge, “Be missionaries for love in the face of contempt.”
This is how our shared house continues to stand.
