The Comity of Nations: Brief Thoughts on a Useful but Neglected Concept
“Whoever meddles in a quarrel not his own is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears.” (Prov. 26:17)
The comity of nations is seldom known or respected at present. It holds that nations and their citizens ought to respect the customs, laws, and actions of other nations insofar as they do not affect their own interests. Americans have no business telling the British to abolish their monarchy, but neither do Britons have any right to criticize our liberties (as bearing arms); for such things are no impediment to trade, military alliance, or other relations.
This notion of minding one’s own country’s business is not the principle which governs contemporary politics. Intervention is the order of the day. Public discourse is dominated by that spirit of social revolution that aspires for all the earth to be made into an all-just paradise. ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere’ is the watchword of this movement, and by extension of much contemporary discourse. That notion is false: and if anyone doubts it, he is seriously requested to show how the laws of Djibouti directly affect the justice of those of Tyrrell County, North Carolina.
But to our point, this notion ignores comity completely. Against it comity proceeds on the assumption that it is necessary, prudent, and most beneficial for people to look after only the affairs of their own places. It has, moreover, divine warrant – the principle of Prov. 26:17 applies to nations and individuals – and example; for when Christ was asked to handle a civil dispute, he responded “Man, who made me a judge or arbitrator over you?” (Lk. 12:14). He said that of his own people, but those that disregard comity make themselves judges over strangers in foreign places – in many cases ones they have never been, nor ever will be. The revolutionary desire for utopia leads people to work themselves into perpetual anxious fits over things well outside their power or responsibility (vv. 25-26).
This undermines health and happiness, and comes at the expense of neglecting one’s proper responsibilities. Against this comity offers a superior alternative grounded in God’s wisdom. It says that one is not responsible for every injustice (real or imagined) in the world, that one need not go about with its weight on his shoulders. This frees one to attend to those things he can actually control (1 Thess. 4:11), and for which he will give account to God (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 14:12). Only those who focus on their proper duties can be happy, and acknowledging comity is necessary to do that.
Comity does not preclude intervention when it is justified and necessary (e.g., defending an ally from invasion), nor does it mean we must approve all that other nations do. It would be prudent and just for us to stop trading with Red China, for example, owing to the egregious oppression and wickedness of its government. But that is a question of governing our own actions, not directly meddling in hers. However that may be, comity should be the standard position for both governments and citizens, with deviation from it being an exception occasioned only by indisputable need.
Tom Hervey is a member of Woodruff Road Presbyterian Church, Greenville Co., SC. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not of necessity reflect those of his church or its leadership or other members. He welcomes comments at tomhervey@substack.com. He is also author of Reflections on the Word: Essays in Protestant Scriptural Contemplation.