Can comity and Comey coexist?

The US Senate is – or was – strongly associated with ideals of comity. Many of the recent articles about former FBI Director James Comey, however, suggest that Senate comity is under threat or already destroyed.    

Jose Luis Magana/AP
Former FBI director James Comey speaks to George Washington University students during a stop on his book tour on April 30, 2018, in Washington.

In news articles about former FBI Director James Comey, the word comity appears with surprising frequency. Mr. Comey has been mentioned along with the “comity” of the Senate, of congressional panels, of laws, and even of a White House garden party – “Comity not Comey?” was the headline – last year. It seems to me that this results from word association. “Comey” looks and sounds like comity, so writers move easily from one to the other. We’ll talk more about that next week. This week, let’s look at comity.

In its broadest sense, comity refers to courtesy, to “kindly and considerate behavior towards others,” as the Oxford English Dictionary puts it. A 17th-century etiquette book picked “comity and affability” (ease talking to others; pleasantness) as essential to a good conversation.

Nowadays, though, its use is almost entirely restricted to the political and legal realms. “The comity of nations,” the idea that countries should respect each other’s laws and customs as far as possible, is a guiding principle of international relations. Comity influences relations among US states as well. Legally, it involves reciprocity: You do something for me, and I’ll do the same for you. It means the courts of Massachusetts recognize judgments from Wyoming, and you can drive all over the country on your Wisconsin license.

The US Senate is – or was – strongly associated with ideals of comity. While they are in the chamber, senators employ an almost exaggerated courtesy, referring to each other as “gentlemen” or “gentlewomen” and “esteemed colleagues.” Many of the recent articles about Comey, however, suggest that Senate comity is under threat or already destroyed.    

In terms of the more superficial sense of comity, this is not true. The Senate has strict rules of decorum. Rule 19 of the Senate bans insults, forbidding members from “imput[ing] ... any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator” to others. People who worry about the decline of Senate civility perhaps forget that this rule was enacted in 1902 after one senator physically attacked another for spreading a “willful, malicious, and deliberate lie.” Outwardly, the Senate remains overwhelmingly courteous.    

But in the more important sense of comity, that of actual respect and reciprocity, things do seem to be going badly. Senators insult each other in interviews and on the campaign trail. Since the 1990s, successive Congresses have struggled to enact laws, partly because partisan scorn puts reciprocity out of the question.  

Affability now sounds like a very old-fashioned virtue. Let’s hope it’s not too late for comity.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Can comity and Comey coexist?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today