2023-01-22T03:49:09-05:00

Last updated on: January 22, 2023 at 3:49 am   By
0 Comments

Derek Winterburn: Zacchaeus / flickr

Zacchaeus, even if he tried to be an ethical tax collector, still was a tax collector, and he made his money, his wealth, on the backs of others. Tax collecting was much different in ancient Rome than it is today, as tax collectors were given a percentage of the money they collected as their pray. He was not as bad as they could come. He wanted to think good of himself. He knew tax collecting was important, even if the method of collection needed reformation. And, as he tried to be ethical, he likely hid from himself the injustices involved in the way he went about his work. Perhaps he reflected upon what he did and how he did it better than others, that is, that he was not as cruel as many of his fellow tax-collectors. Nonetheless, he still made his money in ways which were cruel and unjust. He found a way to game the system,  making a significant amount of wealth for himself. This is why, when he encountered Jesus, he eventually had to admit to himself and to Jesus that he was far from the ethical man he had assumed himself to be. And so, as a part of his metanoia, he made it clear he would more than give back not only the money he unjustly took from others, he would pay it back with interest:

And Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have defrauded any one of anything, I restore it fourfold.” And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. 0 For the Son of man came to seek and to save the lost” (Lk. 19:8-10 RSV).

Zacchaeus’s salvation was possible thanks to Jesus and the grace which Jesus offered him. Nonetheless, to activate that grace and be saved, he had to cooperate with it. He had to change his ways. He had to do what he could do to heal the  pain and sorrow he had caused others to suffer. He couldn’t just ask for forgiveness and remain the same. He certainly could no longer keep the blood money he had collected. To make sure that he did not go back to his old ways, he wanted to make sure the money which was legitimately his was used justly, which is why he decided he would use it to help the poor, redistributing his wealth, making things fairer for all.  We should see in his story not only a warning of the judgment which is to come we take and appropriate wealth unjustly for ourselves, but also the hope that such judgment and the condemnation which it could bring does not have to be the final word, that we, upon realizing the evil we had done can still repent and find salvation. St. Jerome, with his critical view of the rich, said that this means those who are wealthy must ponder how that wealth was accumulated. In doing so, they will see injustices were involved, and once they do, they will have to come to terms with their obligations to their community, starting with the fact that they must help those who have been hurt by such injustices. If they do so, they will replace illegitimate earthly treasure, the kind which does not last forever, with heavenly treasure, a treasure which not only lasts, but can and will be accumulated through justice:

Much truth there is, indeed, in a certain saying of a philosopher: ‘Every rich man is either wicked or the heir of wickedness.’ That is why the Lord and Savior says that it is difficult for the rich to enter into  the kingdom of heaven. Someone may raise the objection: ‘How, then, did the wealthy Zacchaeus enter the kingdom of heaven?’ He gave away his wealth and replaced it at one with the riches of the heavenly kingdom. The Lord and Savior did not say that the rich will not enter the kingdom of heaven, but that they will enter with difficulty. [1]

Zacchaeus, in his own way, serves as a representative of the wealthy in general. Not all the rich have gained their wealth in the same way. Nonetheless, due to the way economics works, it is difficult, if not impossible, for someone to gain extraordinary amounts of wealth in a perfectly just fashion. There will always be some sort of injustice directly or indirectly connected to the accumulation of massive amounts of wealth. And usually, once someone gains more wealth than they need, they will not be satisfied. They will seek to accumulate more and more, and in doing so, taking away the goods of the earth from those who need them. Thus, they fall into the sin of avarice, which is not a minor thing, for avarice, the love of money, can be said to be a root of all evil. Its call, its influence, if not put into check, will be unending. It will suggest to someone to find more and more wealth instead of justly using what one has, and distributing what is in excess to those in need.

St. Hildegard warned that avarice leads to idolatry, as it has people make money their god, leading them to separate themselves from the true God through their wealth:  : “But you who love injustices, keep this admonition in mind, so that you may know that your avariciousness longing for wealth is idolatry, and that it separates you from the angelic orders, that is, from spiritual people, just as the idol of deceit is separated from the true God.” [2]  This does not mean God will not come looking for them – for indeed, as the story of Zacchaeus shows, God does indeed try to get past the barriers people put up. God goes looking for them, engages them, and helps them put away from all the barriers they have put up, so that realizing their errors, they can be like Zacchaeus and find salvation. But we must also see the story as warning to us all, especially to those of us who are not yet rich, making sure we do not take on an avaricious attitude ourselves. We do not have to disregard earthly needs, but we must make sure our pursuit of them is limited to what is just and necessary; if not, as Xunzi noted, we can find ourselves having an never-ending desire to accumulate goods which we do not need:

The natural disposition of people is that for food they want meats, for clothes they want embroidered garments, for travel they want chariots and horses, and moreover they want the riches of surplus wealth and accumulated goods. Even if provided these things, to the end of their years they would never be satisfied; this is also the natural disposition of people. [3]

It is best to remember that the world and all that is in it is meant for the common good, and it is when that common good is lost, that we find the love of money, the love of wealth, dividing up humanity, and in that division, set up a great amount of evil in the world. Ficino pointed out that this was  something that the wisest philosophers came to know and understand, as they all saw those who became so attached to earthly goods became possessed by those very goods:

He confused his dominion, which was vast by nature, to narrow limits. He introduced into the world ‘mine’ and ‘yours’, the origin of all strife and evil. Thus it was to good purpose that Pythagoras directed that everything should be held in common among friends, and that Plato directed the same among citizens. Therefore, those who are rich should be regarded as most unjust if, because of their pride, they forget God, the bountiful giver of all riches. They make themselves masters over the poor, and call themselves possessors of wealth, when it is they who are possessed by their wealth. [4]

Truly, we must not let avarice and its mode of engaging the world dictate to us how we should live. If we do, we will find ourselves turning against the common good. We will cut ourselves off from each other, fighting for the little which we think we possesses as being ours by right, and in doing so, create and reinforce all kinds of injustices. We risk, moreover, finding ourselves stuck, incapable of getting beyond the cycle of pain and sorrow avarice creates. The story of Zacchaeus shows us the way out. We must come to know ourselves, like he did, and accept the need we have to change, realizing of course, we cannot properly change without grace. This does not mean there has been and is no good in us, it is just that we must not use that good to ignore the evil which we have done. Once we come to terms with what we have done, we will be able to reinforce the good we have done by dealing with and healing the harm we have caused, and then, like Zacchaeus, we will find ourselves truly blessed by gaining the treasure which we should seek, that is, the riches of the kingdom of God.

[1] St. Jerome, The Homilies of Saint Jerome: Volume I (1-59 On the Psalms). Trans. Marie Liguori Ewald, IHM (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 1963), 116-7 [Homily 15].

[2] St. Hildegard of Bingen, “Letter 220r” in The Letters of Hildegard of Bingen. Volume III. Trans. Joseph L Baird and Radd K Ehrman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 14.

[3] Xunzi, The Complete Text. Trans. Eric L. Hutton (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016), 29.

[4] Marsilio Ficino, The Letters of Marsilio Ficino. Volume 1.  trans. by members of the Language Department of the School of Economic Science, London (London: Shepheard-Walwyn, 1975; repr. 1988), 119-20 [Letter  73 to Angelo Poliziano].

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

N.B.:  While I read comments to moderate them, I rarely respond to them. If I don’t respond to your comment directly, don’t assume I am unthankful for it. I appreciate it. But I want readers to feel free to ask questions, and hopefully, dialogue with each other. I have shared what I wanted to say, though some responses will get a brief reply by me, or, if I find it interesting and something I can engage fully, as the foundation for another post. I have had many posts inspired or improved upon thanks to my readers.

2022-11-06T03:45:11-05:00

Last updated on: November 6, 2022 at 3:45 am   By

Jacopo Bassano (at the Cleveland Museum of Art): The Rich Man and Lazarus / Wikimedia Commons

With the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus indicated that even if someone were to rise from the dead and warn others of what they might experience in death if they do not change their ways, many would not heed such warnings. They would find some reason to ignore or deny what they are being told. They might try to find excuses to justify themselves, explaining why the warning did not really apply to them, or they might suggest that the person never really was dead, and so not worthy to listen to. In the end, it is clear, because they do not want to believe what they are told, they will continue on as they were.

The story, of course, was not merely theoretical, for it is what happened with Jesus. The irony is that those who say they believe in him and follow him are often those who ignore what he said. This can be seen in the way they justify doing nothing for the poor. Jesus, throughout his ministry, made it clear that the poor, the outcast, those who society wanted nothing to do with, were among those whom God loves and wanted everyone else to love. Jesus also indicated, as a way to show such love, we should be concerned about justice, as it was injustice which made such people suffer. Thus, we have in Jesus, an example of what he meant that if someone were to come back from the dead, their message would not be heeded, for Jesus’ message was not heeded. Many self-proclaimed Christians don’t want to believe Jesus when he said that riches can hinder and weigh us down, that the wounds of the poor, the pain and suffering the poor experience thanks to the fact the rich neglect the common good, will come at a price, a price which cannot be paid off by money.  Is that, not in fact, a point of the parable of the rich man and Lazarus?

There was a rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, full of sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table; moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried;  and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes, and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus in his bosom.  (Lk. 16:19-23 RSV).

The rich man ignored Lazarus, and so Lazarus, who could have been helped by the rich man, indeed, whose life could have been saved if the rich man had cared for him, died. The rich man eventually died. It does not matter how much longer he lived, the point is that his riches, which might have been able to save Lazarus, was not enough to save him. When he died, the rich man, Dives, found himself having to experience the consequences of his actions, while he saw Lazarus was in Abraham’s bosom, being taken care of and shown the hospitality in death which he had not experienced in life.

The rich man was not entirely evil. He still had love for and care for his family, which is what motivated him to want to help his family and warn them of what will happen to them if they do not change their ways. But, unlike the implication suggested by Dickens in “A Christmas Carol,” the rich man was told it would change nothing if the living were visited by the dead:

But Abraham said, `They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ And he said, `No, father Abraham; but if some one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ He said to him, `If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the dead.’  (Lk. 16 29-31 RSV).

The rich man had to face the consequences of his actions; he had to deal with the pain and suffering he gave to others, including and especially Lazarus. The fact that he still had some concern for others suggests that, perhaps, the rich man was redeemable, even if the story almost suggests he was not, but that is because the story dealt with the consequence of death before Jesus’ conquest of death itself. Jesus’ death and resurrection changes the composition of the afterlife; the barriers which existed, the barriers which separated everyone from each other, and from heavenly glory, were broken down. This is where we can find hope for Dives, though he still would have to deal with the consequences of his actions, just as all of us will have to deal with our sins. What is important is that the reason he suffered was due to his lack of charity, that is, because he his greed got the best of him and so he ignored the dictates of justice. He should have understood he would be held responsible for not helping those he could with his money:

And he called out, `Father Abraham, have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.’  But Abraham said, `Son, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ (Lk. 16:23-26 RSV).

While the story was told in such a way that it was implied that there is no bridge between the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus, we know, would eventually make that bridge, allowing all of us to be freed from the chains we made for ourselves due to our sins. Jesus, in his death, journeyed throughout all the realm of the dead, making sure everyone had the opportunity to  follow after him and be saved, freed from the bondage of sin. While the consequences of our sin do not have to go on forever, thanks to the grace of the resurrection, we still have to deal with them and experience them, to some degree. Thus, we can still take the message of this story to light. Jesus would have us remember those around us, to take care of them, and warns us, if we do not do so, we will experience the effects of our uncharity for others coming back upon ourselves. And even though Jesus rose from the dead, confirming the validity of his message, how many ignore it and act as if it were nothing to ignore the poor and dispossessed? Let them heed Jesus. Jesus will not be fooled. If they think they can ignore the poor by appearing pious in public, they will find that their pretend piety will be rejected, and perhaps, add even more to the burden they will have to overcome. Whatever means of piety we use to ignore the expectations of love, though such piety might have some good involved with it, is not going to be enough. While we might want to look good in front of others, and indeed, many of the rich put on acts to do so, in end the end, it is not what is done in such a show which counts. This is why Paul emphasized that circumcision was not necessary for Gentile converts, because forcing them to be circumcised was all about them putting on a pious show, one which did them no good, as it led them to ignore the circumcision of the heart which they needed in order to properly love others:

It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh that would compel you to be circumcised, and only in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. For even those who receive circumcision do not themselves keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may glory in your flesh (Gal, 6:12-13 RSV).

Thus, Paul understood that many seek to be glorified in the little that they do, showing themselves off “in the flesh” as it were, in order to ignore what Jesus said he expected us to do. In reality, we should all take upon ourselves the cross of Christ and follow it, giving of ourselves, not out of show, but out of love. We should not glorify ourselves. We should not do acts of piety in front of others in order to be glorified. All such glory is a sham. The only true glory is in the cross of Christ, and the path of love which emerges from it. “But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6:14 RSV). If we, therefore, claim to follow Jesus, let us truly heed what he said. He showed us love in action and the concerns love will have when it is confronted with injustices. So long as we try justify why that message does not apply to ourselves, we have not truly heeded Jesus, despite believing he came back from the dead.

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

2022-06-02T02:47:36-05:00

Last updated on: June 2, 2022 at 2:47 am   By

Nheyob: Charity Symbol From St Luke Catholic Church In Danville Ohio/ Wikimedia Commons

True charity, caritas, is love. If we want to act with true charity, love would serve the foundation for our actions. This is why, if and when we have some reason other than love for why we give to those in need, our actions are but a simulacra of true charity.  And so, if we act without such love, Paul says we gain nothing for what we do:  “If I give away all I have, and if I deliver my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Cor. 13:3 RSV). We must not confuse charity, caritas, merely with giving away money or other goods to those who are in need, because we can do so for reasons other than love, such as giving away money for the sake of tax benefits or to pretend that we are better people than we really are because we seek some sort of temporal benefit out of such fame.

Charity should never be used as an excuse to ignore the dictates of justice. This is because if we love someone, we would rather they never suffer, for them to never be in need, than for us to have the opportunity to do something to help them deal with their needs. Those who try to pit charity against justice say justice prevents them from doing acts of charity, but all they show is what they want to do is put on a show, not that they care for the people involved. For, just as we would rather someone we loved never get sick than to be in need of and receive medical care, we should desire someone we loved to never be in need thanks to injustices such as racism, sexism, poverty, hunger, homelessness, or any other injustice society has a duty to prevent.

Even if justice prevailed in society, we would still be able to love someone, meaning, there would still be room for true charity, which is why using charity as an excuse to ignore injustice shows how truly uncharitable we really are. Thus, Pope Benedict XVI said, “Love—caritas—will always prove necessary, even in the most just society. There is no ordering of the State so just that it can eliminate the need for a service of love.” [1]  Just as grace perfects nature, so love, true caritas, true charity, takes the good found in justice and uses it as a foundation to lift someone up and make them even better. The common good promoted by a justice should be seen as a starting point, and not the ending point, of our love. This is why, if we see someone we love suffering as a result of injustice, we will do what we can to make sure they receive the justice they do not yet possess. Moreover, if we truly are charitable in our heart, we will work with and through society to eliminate the structures of sin which create such injustice,  replacing them with structures of justice. Of course, as it is not easy to do this, we will also do what we can to take care of the immediate needs of those who suffer from the hands of injustice. We will feed the hungry. We will comfort the abused. We will lift up the downtrodden. But we will realize, all of that is but a band-aid; unless society is transformed, such injustices will continue. This is why we will work with society and use whatever structures we can establish in it to heal the harm done by injustice, seeing that as a part of our charitable endeavors:

Charity goes beyond justice, because to love is to give, to offer what is “mine” to the other; but it never lacks justice, which prompts us to give the other what is “his”, what is due to him by reason of his being or his acting. I cannot “give” what is mine to the other, without first giving him what pertains to him in justice. If we love others with charity, then first of all we are just towards them. Not only is justice not extraneous to charity, not only is it not an alternative or parallel path to charity: justice is inseparable from charity, and intrinsic to it. Justice is the primary way of charity or, in Paul VI’s words, “the minimum measure” of it, an integral part of the love “in deed and in truth” (1 Jn 3:18), to which Saint John exhorts us. On the one hand, charity demands justice: recognition and respect for the legitimate rights of individuals and peoples. It strives to build the earthly city according to law and justice. On the other hand, charity transcends justice and completes it in the logic of giving and forgiving. The earthly city is promoted not merely by relationships of rights and duties, but to an even greater and more fundamental extent by relationships of gratuitousness, mercy and communion. Charity always manifests God’s love in human relationships as well, it gives theological and salvific value to all commitment for justice in the world.[2]

Thus, it is beneficial to repeat: working for justice, working for a just society, far from being an impediment for charity, really is a part of what one who is truly charitable will do. While charity is not threatened by justice, it certainly can be and often is threatened and undermined by its lack. If we truly are charitable, therefore, we would be working for the establishment of justice in society, promoting those structures which will defend society from evil. It is something which we are to engage as a society. We should not pit the church, with the way it is to engage charity, against secular society and the role society has in establishing justice in the world. “We have seen that the formation of just structures is not directly the duty of the Church, but belongs to the world of politics, the sphere of the autonomous use of reason.” [3] The church is to work with and through all secular structures which have been created to establish justice in the world. She does this by showing them what she has in our conscience, that is offering to them the wisdom which can had from her understanding of the common good. One of the important ways she can do this is make sure that justice is not engaged without love, without charity, that is, without mercy; this is to make sure justice does not become the means of establishing a dead legalism which, under the name of justice, begins to subvert the very justice intended. And so, the church, in allowing society its role, will find its role will remain, even as it will always be meant to bring God’s grace, God’s love, into the world,  and in doing so, to bring love to everyone, a love which will always be needed. “The Church can never be exempted from practising charity as an organized activity of believers, and on the other hand, there will never be a situation where the charity of each individual Christian is unnecessary, because in addition to justice man needs, and will always need, love.” [4] Charity is able to do this better when just structures are put in place, for then it will have the tools charity needs to be as effective as possible, which is why Pope Francis, in an examination of the parable of the Good Samaritan, pointed out how the Samaritan relied upon them to render his aid:

True charity is capable of incorporating all these elements in its concern for others. In the case of personal encounters, including those involving a distant or forgotten brother or sister, it can do so by employing all the resources that the institutions of an organized, free and creative society are capable of generating. Even the Good Samaritan, for example, needed to have a nearby inn that could provide the help that he was personally unable to offer. Love of neighbour is concrete and squanders none of the resources needed to bring about historical change that can benefit the poor and disadvantaged.[5]

It should not be surprising that once we pit charity against justice, we begin to ignore the dictates of justice, and in the end, instead of love, hatred is manifested by what we do. Soon, we find ourselves fighting against justice, and the more we do so, the more we will seek excuses to justify injustices, and in doing so, finding ourselves losing more and more of the love we should have as we find ourselves accepting the needlessly suffering of others, or worse, becoming the cause of such suffering. Sadly, as St. Sophronios wisely understood, this is what has happened to so many of us in our lives; we have not allowed the dictates of love, the dictates taught by Christ, the apostles, and the saints, to direct our thoughts and actions; instead we constantly find excuses to dismiss such charity from our hearts so we can justify insane cruelty and hatred of others:

But we pursue the opposite of what these men teach. Not only are we unwilling to love one another, but we want to hate our neighbors as enemies, not realizing, it seems, that enmity and hatred are offspring of the evil spirit. Hence, we treat them with injustice and oppress them and subject them to countless slanderous attacks, and totally bereft of love we inflict every kind of harm on them. [6]

Any attempt to present charity and pit it against justice does not flow from charity. Those who love others will want justice in the world. They will want the common good to be experienced by all. Those who would reject the role of government and its work for the common good, saying it deprives people the chance to engage charity, show they want charity to be some sort of performance art, ignoring the love which should be had in all acts of  charity. Such a simulacra of charity is a Satanic deception which must be denied. Charity without justice is not charity, and those who deny justice, therefore, deny charity itself. This, after all, is manifest in God and God’s love for us: “Who can appraise that love of God for us, unless it is that His justice is so great that in Him there is nothing unjust?”[7] Love will never be satisfied with injustice, and so if we are satisfied with it, we do not have love; and we have been warned that without such love, we end up gaining nothing from whatever act of charity we think do.

[1] Pope Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est. Vatican translation. ¶28.

[2] Pope Benedict XVI, Cartitas in veritate. Vatican translation. ¶6.

[3] Pope Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est,  ¶29.

[4] Pope Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est, ¶29.

[5] Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti. Vatican translation. ¶165.

[6] St Sophronios of Jerusalem, “Homily  7: Homily on the Blessed Apostles Saints Peter and Paul (On the Fourth Day of the Nativity)”  in Homilies. Trans. John M. Duffy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2020), 319-21.

[7] Salvian the Presbyter, “The Governance of God” in The Writings of Salvian the Presbyter. Trans. Jeremiah F. O’Sullivan (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 1962), 107.

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

2022-02-17T03:48:21-05:00

Last updated on: February 17, 2022 at 3:48 am   By

Rick Obst: Eugene Japanese American Art Memorial /flickr

All injustice requires satisfaction as a part of the process which reverses and heals the damage which it been done. This is true, not only on an individual basis, but communally as well Those who rightfully accuse society of wrongdoing, asking for and demanding reparations for injustices, have Jesus on their side, for Jesus was clear that all such debts must be paid in full:

Make friends quickly with your accuser, while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison; truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny (Matt. 5:25-26 RSV).

We might like to think we have no responsibility to those who have been harmed by our society because we believe that we have not contributed to their harm. However, if we have benefited from such injustices, from the system which was established upon and promoted such injustices, we are not so innocent; insomuch as we have benefited from systematic evils, we have incurred a debt which we must pay back due to those evils. Likewise, if we have not done our part to overturn systemic injustices, but instead, have defended the system as it is and the harm which it has caused, our accuser is right to point to us and demand that we contribute our part in the restitution which must be made for such evil to be healed. We cannot say: “The crimes were committed in the past and all who were responsible are dead.”  Even if those who are living today have not directly been involved with such evil, if they have benefited from it, or support the system which came out of it and incorporates it within it, they perpetuate the evil and so are at least partly responsible for its continuation. This is why God said that blame and responsibility for evils continue along family lines, because those who inherit all the benefits from those evil also inherit the debts which come out of them too. [1]

A key example of this is found in the Exodus: the people of Israel forced the Egyptians to pay restitution for all they suffered while in Egypt:

And the Egyptians were urgent with the people, to send them out of the land in haste; for they said, “We are all dead men.”  So the people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneading bowls being bound up in their mantles on their shoulders.  The people of Israel had also done as Moses told them, for they had asked of the Egyptians jewelry of silver and of gold, and clothing; and the LORD had given the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they let them have what they asked. Thus they despoiled the Egyptians (Ex. 12:33-36 RSV).

Those who benefited from the enslavement of the people of Israel, those who got wealthy and privilege were the ones who suffered the most when the people of Israel left Egypt. As justice demanded things were made as equitable as possible, those who gain the most from social evils are expected to contribute the most, and if they were unwilling to do so freely, justice allows that such debt to be paid for by force. Thus the notion that past slavery does not require restitution goes against the example set in Scripture. Once we realize this, once we recognize that guilt does not go away merely because slavery is no longer allowed, it becomes clear that society needs to deal with the implications of slavery and how it continues to influence the world we live in today. Many of those who live in and with privilege today do so because they are heirs to all the evil gains attained by those who had slaves in the past (or those who benefited by association with those who had such slaves).

We must help those who have been harmed by injustices of slavery so that they can truly find their own position in society restored to what it could and should have been if their families had been so unjustly treated justly centuries ago.  Until we do so, systematic injustice will continue, and it will continue in such a way that those who benefited from such evil, those who are now rich because of it, will grow richer, while the poor, thanks in part to the unjust system itself, will continue to be made poorer. This is also true, of course, with relation to the various countries in the world. Those who gained through the exploitation of others must also pay back those they have exploited. We must change the system, as Pope Benedict XVI wrote, so that the demands of justice (individual and communal) can be met; if we do not do so, the injustices will continue to build up and destabilize the world:

The dignity of the individual and the demands of justice require, particularly today, that economic choices do not cause disparities in wealth to increase in an excessive and morally unacceptable manner, and that we continue to prioritize the goal of access to steady employment for everyone. All things considered, this is also required by “economic logic”. Through the systemic increase of social inequality, both within a single country and between the populations of different countries (i.e. the massive increase in relative poverty), not only does social cohesion suffer, thereby placing democracy at risk, but so too does the economy, through the progressive erosion of “social capital”: the network of relationships of trust, dependability, and respect for rules, all of which are indispensable for any form of civil coexistence.[2]

Sadly, we should not be surprised that the promotion of justice will often bring about conflict in the world. This is why Jesus, the prince of peace, said he did not come to bring peace (cf. Matt. 10:34-36); it is not because he did not promote peace but that he realized the promotion of a just peace will first result in conflict before that peace can be produced. Peace is important, but to promote it, we must promote a sustainable and just peace.

When conflicts are not resolved but kept hidden or buried in the past, silence can lead to complicity in grave misdeeds and sins. Authentic reconciliation does not flee from conflict, but is achieved in conflict, resolving it through dialogue and open, honest and patient negotiation. Conflict between different groups “if it abstains from enmities and mutual hatred, gradually changes into an honest discussion of differences founded on a desire for justice”. [3]

To achieve justice, those who have benefited and engaged in injustices will have to be held accountable: their sins, what they have done wrong, and how they have benefited from such evil, must be made clear. We cannot hide such evil from ourselves thinking that if we ignore it, the injustices will somehow go away. Thus, while we must strive for peace, it should be a peace founded upon justice, not injustice, and that means, we must be clear what was done wrong and what must be done to fix that wrongdoing. We must do so for the sake of justice, and with that, love, love for those who have been  unjustly hurt by such injustices, but also love for those who have perpetuated them. For we want those who have done wrong or gained from such wrongdoing to make things right so that they can themselves be restored to a position of justice, making sure they will not incur a greater debt which must be paid in the future.

Our focus, of course, should be for those who have suffered injustice, but justice is not justice if we neglect the foundation of justice is in love itself.  Dorothy Day understood this, which is why she said those who defended the system and all its abuses were worse than the Communists, for the Communists at least understood the problems of society (even if they did not understand and realize the best  solutions for those problems), while those who defended the system defended the evils which should be rejected:

 When people are standing up for our present rotten system, they are being worse than Communists, it seems to me. There is so much positive work to be done that I hate to see people wasting time in this way. I am not arguing for any common front with the Communists – with our voluntary poverty, our works of mercy, the decentralists movement, our fighting of the industrial system, our opposition to war and revolution – it seems to me our position is clear. [4]

Our society has yet to fully deal with the evil of slavery. Though, it be sure, some restitution has been made, some transformation in society has been promoted, it had not been enough. Those who have gained the most from the evil of slavery continue to fight for their privilege, not wanting to give it up. We cannot allow the system to remain as it is. The injustices systematized by society cannot be defended. Society must accept that it has inherited much from the past, including its debts. Though we might think it is difficult,  though we might mourn what such restitution means, we must realize if we work for such justice, if we work to change the system, in the end, all will benefit from such change. Likewise, we should not put off  for tomorrow what we can accomplish today, for if we do so, we will only add to our debts, and so increase the possibility that they will be so great, we will face a great day of reckoning when the time comes for them to be paid in full.  And so, as Pope Francis said, “Let us stop feeling sorry for ourselves and acknowledge our crimes, our apathy, our lies. Reparation and reconciliation will give us new life and set us all free from fear.”[5]

[1] “ The LORD passed before him, and proclaimed, ‘The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.’”  (Ex. 34:6-7 RSV).

[2] Pope Benedict XVI, Cartitas in veritate. Vatican translation. ¶32.

[3] Pope Francis, Fraetelli tutti. Vatican translation. ¶244.

[4] Dorothy Day, “Letter to the Claude McKay. November 2, 1945” in All The Way To Heaven: The Selected Letters of Dorothy Day. Ed. Robert Ellsberg (New York: Image Books, 2010), 203.

[5] Pope Francis, Fraetelli tutti, ¶78.

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

2021-12-07T10:10:52-05:00

Last updated on: December 7, 2021 at 10:10 am   By

US Papal Visit: Pope Francis / flickr

Jesus was often criticized because of the various kinds of people he wanted to help. He came to be a friend to all, including sinners, and as such, his critics accused him of being a sinner. “The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, `Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’” (Lk. 7:34 RSV). Some, however, recognized that something supernatural was happening around Jesus; they said that if he were a sinner, then he must also be doing all he did through the power of demons. “Now he was casting out a demon that was dumb; when the demon had gone out, the dumb man spoke, and the people marveled. But some of them said, ‘He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons’; while others, to test him, sought from him a sign from heaven” (Lk. 11:14-16 RSV). This kind of attack, though often effective, is logically invalid, for it is fallacious, implying guilt by association.

Jesus’ critics called him many things, such as being a drunk, a sinner, a demoniac, all because of the people he associated with. He came to be in and with the poor.  And while they are needy, and so received Jesus’ special attention, they were still human, and therefore, quite imperfect. Many of them were great sinners, and this was one of the reasons why Jesus wanted to be with them. “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mk. 2:17b RSV).

It has always been that those foibles, those sins, which are more likely to be seen and recognized in the poor which the rich, and people in power, have used to attack those who promote the cause of the poor (and others among the oppressed). If some among the oppressed, therefore, see help coming from elements of Marxist thought, and so engage those elements they like, they are accused of being Marxists. Marxism entails a complete system, not just mere elements of it, so to be Marxists, they would have to embrace the whole, but many of the elements lie beyond the concern and  desires of the poor (indeed, if they knew them, many would be rejected by the poor, as for example, the poor tend to be religious, which traditional Marxist thought denigrated). Once the poor, or others among the oppressed, are seen as embracing Marxism, even if they are not doing so, then those who promote the cause of the poor are also seen as promoting Marxism, and this becomes the way those who seek to help them are attacked. This is why many, like Archbishop Gomez, attack social justice movements; though they might claim there is something “pseudo-religious” about them, the real objection lies in the way social justice is seen by many as being connected with Marxism.

Social justice movements are about the causes, not the individual leaders involved. The members and leaders of a particular movement will come from various backgrounds, and so might align themselves to one particular ideology or another, but the movement is not aligned to that ideology just because a particular person in it is. Each movement comes out of an injustice which needs to be righted, which means, the people involved with them will do what they can to promote change. To denounce a movement for particular people involved with them (ignoring that the people involved have a diversity of opinions and  beliefs amongst themselves) is merely another way to engage guilt by association. It is the way of authoritarian control. Those in power do not want things to change; they will look to the zealots and use them as examples of the whole and denounce the whole as a way to promote their objective, which is to stay in power (or to gain even more power).

Pope Francis, of course, understands this; he understands the good in social justice movements, and indeed, how and why they are necessary, whether or not they come from a Christian source. He understood that those attacking such movements often do not care about the truth. He has been critical in the way the media ignores this as they act like all sides, all opinions in a particular debate, are equal. They are not all equal, and the media should be involved in making that known, which is why he said, “In the name of God, I ask the media to stop the logic of post-truth, disinformation, defamation, slander and the unhealthy attraction to dirt and scandal, and to contribute to human fraternity and empathy with those who are most deeply damaged.”[1] He wants us to realize the good in social justice movements, to make sure all people see the good, so that we do not attack those working for the needs of the oppressed. He wants us to know that even if they are not coming from a Christian source, they are to be respected as Good Samaritans.

Sadly, Gomez and his supporters, more than merely ignoring the pleas of Pope Francis, seem to be fighting against them and the Pope because he states them. They think they can continue to engage the debate using the same tactics as they have always done, that is, they think all they need to do is smear their opponents for their associations. It’s not just Gomez. Many bishops in the United States are contending against the teachings of the Pope, aligning themselves with Gomez over the Pope  It seems as if not a day goes by without some American prelate saying or doing something which indicates they have ignored and rejected something that Pope Francis has promoted. Thus, if we look, we can see a bishop has said that they have not and do not plan on receiving a COVID vaccination after Pope Francis and the Vatican have stated the moral necessity of being  vaccinated. When a bishop goes against the Pope, they always have an excuse which they offer, but it tends to be bad (such as when the bishop who does not get vaccinated says he does not need to do so because immune system is strong). The reality is that they have an agenda, and it is not one dictated by Catholic teaching or morality, but a dangerous ideology which rejects the principles of social justice, an ideology, which likewise, likes to signal its dissent (which is why the bishop made it known he did not get vaccinated).

Yes, the poor, and those who are oppressed, often are not saints. They do not have to be for us to care about them and their concerns. Jesus, after all, cared for them and promoted them in what he said and did. Dorothy Day, who was also attacked for her work for the poor, understood this, but said that this is not a good excuse to ignore their needs:

I will agree with you that the poor man is also greedy. I believe I pointed out that greed in the editorial column last month. I do not think, whoever, that we are guilty of envy or begrudging a rich man  his wealth if we point out the abuses of the capitalist system which allows one man to accumulate the most of the world’s goods while other families suffer year after year, the aching pinch of poverty if not of actual destitution. St. Jerome and many many Fathers of the Church, and our Leader Himself condemned the rich and no one would dare breathe the word of envy in connection with them. [2]

We are to work for and promote the needs of all, the common good, and we do this by promoting the preferential option for the poor, lifting up those who suffer the greatest injustices. We do not have to agree with them and all they do to care for them and see they are people whose dignity have been ignored. This is why, even if we can find things which we do not like in those we support, we find those who denigrate them and seek to keep things as they are to be far worse. For God, despite all the sins one can find among the poor, still hears their cries and gives them mercy, lifting them up and promoting them over their abusers:

Yet for the poor and indigent the very rejection by the rich is sufficient to draw upon them mercy from above; for just as the hardness of heart of the prosperous and their indifference towards their fellow-slaves shuts to them the gates of the Lord’s compassion, so unmercifullness and disregard of the unfortunate opens to the latter some access to divine acceptance. [3]

Those use religion to promote the powers that be, and the injustices in the system, denigrate religion just as much as they denigrate those they abuse. It is that kind of  religious person, that kind of Pharisee (not all Pharisees were like this), which Jesus criticized. When we are critical of religious authorities who act like this, therefore, we are not being critical of religious authority as a whole, but its abuse.  A good bishop is a servant, looking after their flock, promoting justice, while bad ones look for ways to get more and more power for themselves, helping their friends and associates loot the system for all it is worth, leaving more and more people disenfranchised; thus, they resemble the way St Jerome described bad Pharisees:

But the Pharisees were zealous for this one precept, namely, the accumulation of what had been commanded. Other things that were of greater importance mattered little to them. They did not care whether anyone did them or not. And so, he accuses them of greed on this point, that they zealously exact a tithe even of common herbs, yet they neglect justice in business disputes, and mercy toward the poor and orphan and widows, and faithfulness to God, which are great matters.[4]

St. Isidore of Seville, likewise, made it clear how  many church leaders fall into grave sin because they do not use their authority properly, but rather, seek friendship with the rich and powerful so as to become their servants instead of servants of God:

Many leaders of the churches, fearing that they will lose the friendship and incur the hostility of those who hate them, do not correct those who sin, and they are afraid to rebuke those who oppress the poor; nor are they afraid of the severity of the retribution that will be handed out to them, due to the fact that they have been silent about the common people entrusted to their care.[5]

Those bishops which neglect justice, those who will attack social justice policies and those movements which seek to put them into place, harm the poor and the oppressed for the sake of the rich and powerful. They might like to show themselves off as great men of religious authority, but they also show  themselves to be far from the religious sentiment they are meant to hold: “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world” (Jas. 1:27 RSV).

Social justice is important. True religion cannot ignore it. But sadly, many with positions of power and authority sell their souls for money, and in doing so, find themselves slaves to the rich and powerful instead of serving Christ. They have become stained by the world. They neglect the teachings of Christ as they fight against those who would promote the common good. They attack those who engage social justice with the same kind of denunciations Jesus’ critics used to attack Jesus. They engage guilty by association, trying to smear those who promote justice. They want the faithful to ignore social justice. But the faithful know they can’t.

[1] Pope Francis, “Video Messages on the Fourth World Meeting of Popular Movements.” Vatican translation.  ¶2.

[2] Dorothy Day, “Letter To Fr. Anthony Wolf. November 13, 1934” in All The Way To Heaven: The Selected Letters of Dorothy Day. Ed. Robert Ellsberg (New York: Image Books, 2010), 86.

[3] St. Photius, The Homilies of Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Trans. Cyril Mango (Harvard: Harvard University Press, 1958; repr. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2017), 63 [Homily 2].

[4] St. Jerome, Commentary on Matthew. Trans. Thomas P. Scheck (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 2008), 263.

[5] St. Isidore of Seville, Sententiae. Trans. Thomas L. Knoebel (New York: Newman Press, 2018),  195.

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

2021-11-09T06:23:50-05:00

Last updated on: November 9, 2021 at 6:23 am   By

Tim Kubacki: The Good Samaritan /flickr

In the Gospels, we read of the way many of the apostles were upset when they learned that there were others exorcising demons in Jesus’ name. John wanted to forbid them because he thought they were ignoring the apostles and their role in delegating the activities of the faithful. Jesus, however, said that John was wrong; Jesus indicated that John, the apostles, and therefore, the church should not be so controlling, but rather, they should welcome the good work of others:

 But Jesus said, “Do not forbid him; for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon after to speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is for us. For truly, I say to you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ, will by no means lose his reward” (Mk. 9:38-41 RSV).

Jesus wanted us to realize that when others did good, we should not be afraid and think they were replacing us. Instead, we should see how their work joins in with what we are (or should be) doing. Indeed, they will be rewarded for the good which they do. For, as he said elsewhere, even those who did good without explicitly doing it in his name or for him will find that they were doing it for him and with him when the truth is revealed (cf. Matt. 25:31-46).

When others put into practice works of justice and mercy, we should recognize they are working with us, not against us. We should not be afraid of them as if they are our rivals. We should not act or suggest that by doing such work, they are setting up new religions which seek to undermine our work. If we are afraid, it is not because of the good they do, but rather, because they put us to shame because they do the good which we have failed to do.  We must see that they rise up among us to do what we have not done,  and this is because the Lord will always lift someone up and have them do what is good and just if those who should be doing such work do not do so. This is one of the meanings we should get from Jesus when he said that the stones would cry out if those who should speak, do not speak (cf. Lk. 19:40).

Dorothy Day understood this. She believed that one of the reasons why communists were so successful in the world is because Christians had ignored the cry of the oppressed:

As Catholics we too feel called upon to protest against the Nazi persecution of Catholica and Jews by demonstration and distribution of literature. We feel that we would be neglecting our duty as Catholics if we did not do this. The Bishops of the Catholic Church have stated that many of the social aims of the Communists are Christian aims and should be worked for by Christians. We feel that Communism is gaining in this country, because Christian people do not protect against injustice as they do. [1]

A part of the problem lay in the way many Catholics believed that they need do nothing, that God could and would take care of everyone. They had lost their incarnational vision, believing that we should just focus on heaven while ignoring the earth and all that happened on it:

I have said over and over again that Catholics have more faith in God than they have in man and that is the trouble with religion. It is transferring our hopes from earth to heaven and from man to God to such an extent that we turn  to pie in the sky and forget that we are all members of the Mystical Body of Christ right here on this earth. [2]

The eschaton had become immanent, heaven had joined with earth, and so now, we, who have become a part of the Mystical Body of Christ, are expected to continue the work of Christ on earth. We are not to ignore injustices. We are not to ignore the plight of the poor. We are not to ignore abuses and do nothing when we see them going on. We are to promote the dignity of the human person. When systematic abuse undermines that dignity, we must work to overturn such abuse. If we won’t, someone else will, and they will be doing the work which we should be doing; they would be the ones exorcising evil from the world. When they do so, we should not be like John, complaining as if they took something away from us, but rather, we should remember what Jesus said, that those who are not against us are with us, and so we should support them in the work they do. Indeed, we are called to share that work with everyone, no matter their background: “The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men.” [3]

The work of social justice has often been neglected by Christians. This has caused many others to take our place in the work which mut be done. They raised the awareness of problems which we have long ignored. Their solutions might be imperfect, but they are at least attempts to engage problems which we failed to recognize. We must hear the cry of the oppressed, and even listen to those who have spoken out on their behalf. We must have the humility to learn from those who have taken the issues seriously, even if we must also add to it what was lacking, that is, the grace which we have been given, the grace which can perfect nature. It is long past time for us to take our responsibility seriously, which is why Vatican II said that it is now a special obligation for us, in our times, to deal with issues of social justice:

In our times a special obligation binds us to make ourselves the neighbor of every person without exception and of actively helping him when he comes across our path, whether he be an old person abandoned by all, a foreign laborer unjustly looked down upon, a refugee, a child born of an unlawful union and wrongly suffering for a sin he did not commit, or a hungry person who disturbs our conscience by recalling the voice of the Lord, “As long as you did it for one of these the least of my brethren, you did it for me” (Matt. 25:40). [4]

And because others have indeed done work which we have not done, they have taken on the role of the Good Samaritan. They have proved their love of neighbor has been greater than our own. We must draw near them, and work with them, indeed, learn from them. One thing many of them tell us is that we must help others, regardless of their social group. Pope Francis, having learned this, says the same:

Jesus asks us to be present to those in need of help, regardless of whether or not they belong to our social group. In this case, the Samaritan became a neighbour to the wounded Judean. By approaching and making himself present, he crossed all cultural and historical barriers. Jesus concludes the parable by saying: “Go and do likewise” (Lk 10:37). In other words, he challenges us to put aside all differences and, in the face of suffering, to draw near to others with no questions asked. I should no longer say that I have neighbours to help, but that I must myself be a neighbour to others. [5]

Likewise, we must work with all who would serve and love their neighbor, regardless of their social group. This is why Jesus had a Samaritan as the one who did good in his parable, for the Samaritans were looked down upon by those who were in Jesus’ Jewish community. They were seen as outsiders, indeed, as religious rivals because of their alternative take and understanding of the Torah. We, therefore, must recognize the good which is done by those who are not Christians, those who engage social justice. If we try to find excuses to denigrate that work because they are not Christians like us, we have not learned what Jesus wanted us to learn from his parable. Recognizing this, Pope Francis made it clear that various groups working for and embracing social justice must be seen as taking the place of the Good Samaritan today:

Do you know what comes to mind now when, together with popular movements, I think of the Good Samaritan? Do you know what comes to mind? The protests over the death of George Floyd. It is clear that this type of reaction against social, racial or macho injustice can be manipulated or exploited by political machinations or whatever, but the main thing is that, in that protest against this death, there was the Collective Samaritan who is no fool! This movement did not pass by on the other side of the road when it saw the injury to human dignity caused by an abuse of power. The popular movements are not only social poets but also collective Samaritans.[6]

We must not speak of popular social justice movements with disdain, seeking to undermine them; rather, we must recognize the cry of the oppressed has been heard by them. They are not willing to pass by the oppressed like we have. They are not rivals, but rather, fellow workers and leaders in dealing with the issues of the day. Do we have to agree with everything they believe? No, just as Jesus did not promote everything the Samaritans believed when he used a Samaritan to represent the kind of love we should all have for our neighbor. We are dealing with major problems in the world, none of us, not even Christians, know all that needs to be done, which is why we must work together. We can and should complement each other with what we know and can do. We must truly realize and accept that those who are with us in pursuit of social justice are not against us. Thus, Pope Francis also said:

The social teaching of the Church does not have all the answers, but it does have some principles that along this journey can help to concretize the answers, principles useful to Christians and non-Christians alike. It sometimes surprises me that every time I speak of these principles, some people are astonished, and then the Holy Father gets labeled with a series of epithets that are used to reduce any reflection to mere discrediting adjectives. It doesn’t anger me, it saddens me. It is part of the post-truth plot that seeks to nullify any humanistic search for an alternative to capitalist globalisation, it is part of the throwaway culture, and it is part of the technocratic paradigm. [7]

We must keep in mind what Jesus said. Jesus said we should not oppose those casting out demons. Those who work to cast out various injustice in the world by exorcising the systematic injustices which created them are with us and not against us. We are not to forbid them from acting on behalf of those suffering from such abuse. Rather, we are to work with them so we can make sure all forms of systematic evil are overturned. This way those evils which they do not know or neglect do not become neglected and cause new and worse forms of evil in society. We must work with them, not insult and reject them, for when we do that, all we do is make sure such evil remains and the good which Jesus would have us do is undermined.

[1] Dorothy Day, “Letter To the New York Police Commissioner. July 1935 ” in All The Way To Heaven: The Selected Letters of Dorothy Day. Ed. Robert Ellsberg (New York: Image Books, 2010), 95.

[2] Dorothy Day, “Letter to the Buffalo Catholic Worker. 1940,” in All The Way To Heaven: The Selected Letters of Dorothy Day. Ed. Robert Ellsberg (New York: Image Books, 2010), 156.

[3] Vatican Council II. Nostra Aetate.. Vatican translation. ¶2.

[4] Vatican Council II. Gaudium et spes. Vatican translation. ¶27.

[5] Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti. Vatican translation. ¶81.

[6] Pope Francis, “Video Messages on the Fourth World Meeting of Popular Movements.” Vatican translation.  ¶3.

[7] Pope Francis, “Video Messages on the Fourth World Meeting of Popular Movements.” Vatican translation.  ¶3.

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

2021-11-04T08:34:36-05:00

Last updated on: November 4, 2021 at 8:34 am   By

No Artist Listed: Friends Globe Justice Fairness Community / maxpixel

Servant of God, Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara OFS, famously said: “When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a communist.” In doing this, he shows us what happens to those who work for justice. They get called all kinds of names. They are accused of being things they are not. They are given such labels by their critics so that their critics will only have to engage strawmen, while they will then have to defend themselves before promoting their own real agenda. We find so many people are influenced by such scare tactics, which is why they are used. It is difficult for someone to defend themselves from such mislabeling.

The problem which Câmara saw in his day is a problem which not only has not been rectified, but has become much worse. Those who work for and promote justice continue to be called socialists and communists, no matter what perspective they use to promote justice. And this association, of course, is used to condemn any and all forms of social work. We can see this in the way many people react to those working to heal the wound of systematic racism. They are accused of being secret communists trying to destroy society. This is why authentic Critical Race Theory (CRT), which looks at systematic racism, its causes, and what kinds of legal and economic solutions can be used to fix those problems, has become labelled “communist.” This has led to CRT itself as becoming a new label in and of itself, where it is assured to be bad because it is communistic, and so must be rejected and forbidden from being taught in schools. Anyone who is concerned with the history of racism, the impact of racism on society, and the ways to deal with racism are told they cannot teach their concerns in schools. They are not allowed to change the hearts of the young, and the only reason why this is done is to make sure those who are privileged by systematic racism can continue in that privilege.

Social justice is an important element of Christian teaching. It is found in Scriptures, indeed, it is found in the writings of the prophets, and promoted by Jesus himself. He consistently argued against the injustices found in society and those who gained privilege because of them. He spoke out on behalf of the poor, and condemned the rich and other leaders in society who ignored the plight of the people (cf. Lk. 6:20 -26). Throughout the centuries, those who read Scripture carefully noticed this, and would join in with their own condemnation of society for the systematic evils found in them, evils which often centered around the rich and the way they kept their power and wealth out of the hands of the poor and needy. “Through the pride of his riches the rich man rules over other men, whom he can harm, and treats them badly, just as if they were not fellow creatures, and in this way the good name of mankind (that man is the image and likeness of God [cf. Gen 1.26]) is blasphemed.”[1] It is with this understanding that St. Salvian the Presbyter lamented:

Where can you find any one who is not poor, whether actually or by status, who is safe living beside a rich man? By the encroachments of the powerful the weak lose their belongings, or even themselves along with their belongings. Not unrightly does the Holy Word apply to both when it says: ‘the wild ass is the lion’s prey in the desert: so also the poor are devoured by the rich.’ For, not only the poor, but almost the whole human race, is suffering from this tyranny. [2]

Those with wealth and privilege always use it to justify themselves and ignore the plight of those who do not have them, but if they are ever called to task, if they ever lose what wealth and privilege they have, they show how far they are from virtue by the way they want to destroy everything, harming all because they no longer are accorded privileges which were not justly theirs in the first place:

The proud are always taking up cause against the good ones; when prosperity shines on them, boastfully they glory in their own merits, and then they draw away from the afflictions of the good and just; but when adversities come upon them, they are turned quickly to blasphemy by the weakness of their spirit.[3]

How many of the rich, how many of those in positions of privilege, have looked down upon others, saying their position is accorded to them because they have been blessed for their goodness? How many justify the way they treat others by saying others are morally inferior to them? Systematic racism often combines with it this ideology as can be see in the way many who continue to promote it (and outright racism) look down on other races as being inferior. And if anyone responds to them, saying all humans are good and worth of equal dignity and honor, once again, the response is to say such criticism stems from communism and is to be rejected. This is why those who study systematic racism, its causes, and who try to find solutions to it, are condemned as communists and the whole cause, labeled as CRT, is attacked as a communist plot.

Christians should know better. As Câmara indicated, we should ask for the root causes of the problems before us, and when we find them, we must overturn them so as to change the system itself. We must not allow this to work. We must let compassion wrote, as Albert Schweitzer said, “We must never permit the voice of humanity within us to be silenced. It is man’s sympathy with all creatures that first makes him truly a man.”[4] If we are to be what we are called to be, when we see injustices, we will want to right them because we will care about those who have been harmed by them.

“The Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against men or harassment of them because of their race, color, condition of life, or religion.”[5] Racism is a real issue; it not only continues to be a threat, but  the responses given to those who try to work against racism show racists will do all they can to stay in positions of power and privilege. When they lose it, they become destructive; they will not blame themselves for the destruction, but rather those who try to create a more just society. When Christians oppose social justice work, work which includes rejecting and overturning systematic racism, they show themselves acting contrary to the teachings of the Gospel and so are worse off because, as Salvian said, they should be better:

Therefore, for this very reason, Christians are worse because they should be better. They do not practice what they preach, and they struggle against the faith by their morals. All the more blameworthy is evil which the label of goodness accuses, and the holy name Is the crime of an unholy man. [6]

Systematic racism is allowed to continue because the root causes of it, the ideologies and prejudices which created it, continue. We must therefore work to change hearts so that what establishes the system and keeps it in place can be and will be eliminated. This is why racism needs to be talked about in schools. This also means, of course, we not only change the hearts but the system, and so we must look into the laws, see which promote injustice, and eliminate them as well:

Racism will disappear from legal texts only when it dies in people’s hearts. However, there must also be direct action in the legislative field. Wherever discriminatory laws still exist, the citizens who are aware of the perversity of this ideology must assume their responsibilities so that, through democratic processes, legislation will be put in harmony with the moral law. Within a given State, the law must be equal for all citizens without distinction. A dominant group, whether numerically in the majority or minority, can never do as it likes with the basic rights of other groups. It is important for ethnic, linguistic or religious minorities who live within the borders of the same State, to enjoy recognition of the same inalienable rights as other citizens, including the right to live together according to their specific cultural and religious characteristics. Their choice to be integrated into the surrounding culture must be a free one.[7]

And, of course, if we are going to change the system, if we are going to make things just, we must lift up those who have been oppressed:

From the legal point of view, all persons (individual or corporate) have a right to equitable reparation if personally and directly they have suffered injury (material or moral). The duty to make reparation must be fulfilled in an appropriate way. As far as possible, reparation should erase all the consequences of the illicit action and restore things to the way they would most probably be if that action had not occurred. When such a restoration is not possible, reparation should be made through compensation (equivalent reparation). This is the most common form of reparation, but the calculation of the compensation is often difficult. When compensation does not suffice to make reparation for a moral injury, moral reparation can be made, that is satisfaction. An example of this is the offering of an apology or expression of regret to the victim State by the State responsible for the wrong.[8]

Catholic teaching, therefore, works with and promotes authentic Critical Race Theory, when Critical Race Theory is seen as the legalistic enterprise to work for and promote racial justice (and not the misrepresented form of it used to undermine all attempts to promote social justice).

So many people like to use labels as a way to undermine the work for justice. They use such labels for scare tactics. The people they talk to do not know what the labels really mean, and what differentiates those who the labels actually represent and those who are being misidentified by them. And this is done in order to keep things as they are, or worse, to continue reinforce systematic injustice and create further barriers between the privileged and those lacking such privilege. If we are to be disciples of Christ, we cannot accept this. Christ spoke out against the abuse of privilege. We must do so as well.

 

[1] St. Hildegard of Bingen, “Letter 378” in The Letters of Hildegard of Bingen. Volume III. Trans. Joseph L Baird and Radd K Ehrman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 165.

[2] Salvian the Presbyter, “The Governance of God” in The Writings of Salvian the Presbyter. Trans. Jeremiah F. O’Sullivan (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 1962), 97.

[3] St. Isidore of Seville, Sententiae. Trans. Thomas L. Knoebel (New York: Newman Press, 2018),210.

[4] Albert Schweitzer, The Animal World of Albert Schweitzer. Trans. and ed. Charles R. Joy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1950), 177.

[5] Nostra Aetate. Vatican translation. ¶5.

[6] Salvian the Presbyter, “The Governance of God,” 123.

[7] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, “The Church and Racism: Towards a More Fraternal Society.” Vatican translation (1988). ¶29.

[8] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, “Contribution to World Conference Against Racism. Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance.” Vatican translation. (Aug. 31- Sept 7, 2001). ¶12.

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

2021-08-26T05:11:34-05:00

Last updated on: August 26, 2021 at 5:11 am   By

torstensimon: COVID19 vaccines / pixabay

The COVID19 pandemic continues, thanks, especially because many have not done what they can to contain it. Many people who can get the vaccine refuse to do so. Many people who can wear mask refuse to do so, even when they are sick and coughing. Many people refuse all social distancing measures, and so if someone around them gets sick with COVID19, they and their loved ones get sick as well, with many of them dying of the disease which they once denied was a real threat.  ICU beds are running out  as people are dying, waiting for medical attention. So much of this could have been prevented if only people did what was needed and did not resist the state when the state told them to act for the sake of the common good and get vaccinated and wear masks where appropriate. The state has the right to issue mandates which work for the protection of society, if such protection can be shown to be effective and morally sound, both which have been proven in regards the vaccine and masking mandates.

While there are many religious leaders, especially evangelical Christian leaders, who have provided misinformation on vaccines and on COVID19, more religious leaders around the world have been telling their faithful to get vaccinated and to do what they can to help save lives. Pope Francis said that the faithful should not need a mandate to get vaccinated as they should do so out of the Christian obligation to love one’s neighbor. But, because many people are not doing as they should voluntarily, and the need is great (for the number of needless deaths will only increase when there are no more ICU beds available), it is possible to mandate what should be done out of love: justice must imposes its demands when people will not act out of charity. This is why we see bishops, Catholic and Episcopal, requiring workers in their dioceses to get vaccinated, even as others indicate they will not give out religious exemptions to those who want to claim religious opposition to vaccination.

It’s sad to see all the Christian opposition to proper and needful initiatives to save lives. Christians should know better. The foundation of Christian morality is the law of love, and that law, as St. Augustine explained, means Christians should do nothing which would cause undue harm or evil to their neighbor:

The rule of love is that one should wish his friend to have all the good things he wants to have himself, and should not wish the evils to befall his friend which he wishes to avoid himself. How shows this benevolence to all men. No evil must be done to any. Love of one’s neighbor workerth no evil (Rom. 13:10). Let us then love even our enemies as we are commanded, if we wish to be truly unconquered. [1]

Letting a deadly virus spread and destroy lives which do not have to be destroyed is far from love; it is either  done out of malice, selfishness, or the kind of pride associated with people who do not like to be told what to do and will not do what they are told to do, even when it is for their own best interests. Those who fight in this manner, while claiming to be Christian, should heed Scripture, because it consistently tells them to humble themselves, for it says it  is with such humility we get grace and the benefits of grace can be activated in our lives (cf. Jas. 4:6 and Prov. 16:18). It is, moreover, an issue of salvation, for those who ignore justice, those who ignore the needs of the common good for the sake of their own private desires, risk condemnation because they have not established the law of love in their own lives, while those who are concerned with the common good and work for it out of love, engender the right disposition for their own salvation, as Julianus Pomerius wrote about in the fifth century:

In view of this one should consider whether they act justly who, removing themselves from all occupations and devoting themselves to spiritual pursuits,  do nothing for human society, and, preferring their own desires to the advantage of all, disregard the common good by choosing a welcome freedom. For, to be unwilling to help the afflicted when you can, to wish to enjoy restful quiet without regard for the common good is surely not equity. Those who  respect this equity of all life for the good of all and, as though born for another, guard and love one another’s salvation. [2]

Christian writers have long understood the implications of this. Society is formed for the sake of the common good, and society can and should put laws and regulations into place which protect the common good from the hands of private individuals whose inordinate desires, if left unchecked, would harm society. Roger Bacon, therefore, pointed out that the public good is more important than private desires while pointing out that when the public good is embraced, the private good can be improved as well:

But public good takes precedence of private good, as Aristotle says in the first book of the Metaphysics. But the part preceding contains the public good ; this part urges upon men private good. For love is the greatest virtue, and is ordained for the common good, and peace and justice are its companions, virtues which transcend the morals of individuals. For man is a social animal and it is in accordance with his own nature, as Avicenna says in the fifth book on the Soul, that he should not live alone like a beast which in its life suffices itself alone. Therefore the laws regulating men with regard to the last topic are more important. [3]

In relation to our human character, St. Thomas Aquinas said that there are many goods for us to follow, among which is our political good, whereupon once again, we find the need to protect and promote the common good:

But the proper good of man must be considered in various ways, according as man is understood under various aspects. The proper good of man as man is the good of reason, in that to be a man is too be rational. But the good of man considered as an artist is the good of art; so also considered in his political character, his good is the common good of the state.[4]

The good must be obtained in a proper fashion, and then preserved. “But to love the good of any society involves a twofold consideration: first, in the manner in which it is obtained; secondly, the manner in which it is preserved. “[5] In regards vaccination and mask mandates, those who are vaccinated and those who wear masks are helping to preserve the good of society, while those who do not do so, hinder and destroy the common good, leading to an unseemly number of unnecessary deaths.

Origen tells us that Jesus Christ takes on the qualities associated with the divine energies so that we can label him with such qualities, such as truth, justice and sanctification:

The Lord Jesus Christ is justice. No one who acts unjustly is subordinate to Christ, justice. The Lord Christ is truth. No one is subordinate to Christ, the truth, who lies or holds false teaching. The Lord Christ is sanctification. No one is subordinate to Christ, sanctification, when he himself is profane and defiled. The Lord Christ is peace. No one is subordinate to Christ who is hostile or bellicose, unable to say, “I was peaceful with those who hate peace.” [6]

Justice demands us to work for and promote the common good. If we work for the common good, we will protect life. When we ignore the demands of justice for the sake of own personal desires, we find ourselves standing away from Christ, who is, as Origen said, justice. We stand in opposition to him and what he would have us to do, that is, we end up standing against the dictates of love and what they would have us do in the present situation. We should not need mandates. We should not need to be told what to do. But, sadly, we find that when there are no such mandates in place, people will continue to act selfishly and ignore the needs of their neighbor. The state can’t mandate love and force us to act out of love, but it can promote justice and tell us to follow rules in accordance to the dictates of justice. Christians must not try to use the voluntary expectations of love to undermine the necessary needs of  justice, because the two issues are separate. The state can’t mandate love, but it can and must do what it can to promote the common good, which means, to regulate actions which would cause harm to society. The state can mandate vaccines for this reason.

[1] St. Augustine, “Of True Religion,” in Augustine: Earlier Writings. trans. John H.S. Burleigh (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1953),270.

[2] Julianus Pomerius, The Contemplative Life. Trans. Mary Josephine Suelzer, PhD (Westminster, MD: The Newman Bookshop, 1947), 155-6.

[3] Roger Bacon, Opus Majus. Part II. trans. Robert Belle Burke (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1928), 663.

[4] St. Thomas Aquinas, On Charity. Trans. Lottie H. Kendzierski (Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press, 1960; repr. 1984). 28 [ Art. II].

[5] St. Thomas Aquinas, On Charity,  29 [ Art. II].

[6] Origen, Homilies on the Psalms: Codex Monacensis Graecus 314. Trans. Joseph W. Trigg (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 2020), 90 [Homily 2 on Psalm 36].

 

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

2021-07-28T03:59:41-05:00

Last updated on: July 28, 2021 at 3:59 am   By

Unknown artist: St. Epiphanius of Cyprus / Wikimedia Commons

Justice is important. God desires us to seek after and promote it. Those who promote the dictates of justice, do God’s work. However, what we promote is not proper if all we seek after is legalistic forms of justice which know nothing of mercy and grace. Thus, those who act justly, those who promote social reforms and the restitution needed to reestablish justice in a society which has abandoned it, find that mercy is necessary for those reforms to be executed. This is why those who are just in their actions find that they bring not only justice to their society, but God’s pardon to it as well: “Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, look and take note! Search her squares to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth; that I may pardon her” (Jer. 5:1 RSV).

If we want to be free from the burden of the law, we must fulfill the purpose of the law, which means, we must embrace justice. To do so, to seek after the meaning of the law, requires us to look beyond a legalistic approach to the law. We must seek to do what the law intends us to do in such a way we do out of nature and not mere obligation. “For this reason, begin to be just and you shall be free from the Law, because a law which is already contained in morals cannot contravene morals.”[1] On the other hand, if we do not embrace justice, if our society turns away from such justice, we risk the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah, for they were destroyed from within, as their lack of justice left them no standing by which they could be saved (cf. Ezek. 16:49).

Those who promote justice, those who act out such justice, can and will be able to save those who otherwise would suffer the fate of their injustices. Just as the cries of the oppressed reach up to God, demanding justice, so the work of the righteous rises up to God like incense so that in and through them, God can be appeased and the wrath of God, seen in and through the consequences of social injustices, can be overtaken by God’s mercy, bringing pardon to all:

Someone else asked him [Epiphanius of Cyprus]: ‘Is one righteous man enough to appease God?’ He replied, ‘Yes, for he himself has written: “Find a man who lives according to righteousness, and I will pardon the whole people.”’ (Jer. 5:1).[2]

St. Epiphanius of Cyprus was known, in part, for his fight against heresy; sometimes, he misunderstood people and fought against them wrongly (this can especially be seen with his association with Theophilus of Alexandria and their struggles against St. John Chrysostom). He was very conservative in principle and in ideals. Nonetheless, he tried to truly live out the faith and its teachings, which is why he understood how justice, how righteousness, could be and would be shared. He saw firsthand how one just and holy person could and would bring mercy and grace to a society which was not completely just. One holy and just person is enough. Many of the desert monks and nuns understood this in the way they wrote on the accomplishments of their own holy saints, from St. Antony of Egypt, to St. Macarius the Great: those saints not only accomplished righteousness in themselves, but they became so holy they were able to act as mediators for the world, preserving people from destruction.

If we want to inherit the kingdom of God, we will seek after justice, for, as God said to the people of Israel, it is only in and through the pursuit of justice will we receive our true inheritance:

You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality; and you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and subverts the cause of the righteous. Justice, and only justice, you shall follow, that you may live and inherit the land which the LORD your God gives you (Deut. 16:19-20 RSV).

As long as we subvert the cause of justice, we will find ourselves far from the righteousness of God. As long as we are far from the righteousness of God, we will not be able to receive the bounty of God’s deifying grace. If we want to be heirs of God, if we want to be partakers of the divine nature and realize the divine life in ourselves, we must embrace justice. We must act on its expectations. We must allow it to become second nature to us so that we will always end up doing what is right and just naturally.

We are not meant to be, nor can we ever truly be, individuals cut off from each other. We are interconnected. What we do has an effect on everyone else, even as what they do has an effect on us. If we love Jesus, we will do as Jesus said. As we follow Jesus’ words, the justice of God will rise in our soul. We will find ourselves becoming vessels of God’s grace, so that in and through us, others will receive the grace and pardon which they need. Thus, we will bring God’s mercy to society. This is why God can and will be appeased by one just person. Indeed, the Christian faith is founded, in part, on this principle: it is in and through the one perfectly just person, Jesus, that the pardon of God is spread throughout humanity and the whole of creation. To believe in the Christian faith, to believe in the saving work of Jesus, is to believe in the social dimension of justice, and therefore, in the way one person and their justice can bring salvation to others, even as one person and their injustice, can and will bring others down with them (as the doctrine of original sin teaches).

Those who are truly holy, those who seek righteousness through justice, know that they are not separated from the rest of the world. They know that their work is not just for themselves, but for the world. No one is an island all by themselves. We are all interconnected. Try as we might, we will never be separate from the rest of the world. Let us therefore disavow such an illusion and realize, therefore, our need for justice is social, and the ramifications of our actions, just or unjust, are social as well. If we are just, we will indeed bring God’s pardon to the world, so that through us, and the justice which we have embraced, many will find God’s mercy and love.

[1] Salvian the Presbyter, “The Governance of God” in The Writings of Salvian the Presbyter. Trans. Jeremiah F. O’Sullivan (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 1962) 127.

[2] The Sayings of the Desert Fathers. trans. Benedicta Ward (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1984), 58 [Saying of Epiphanius 14].

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

2021-07-08T09:37:50-05:00

Last updated on: July 8, 2021 at 9:37 am   By

David Roberts: Israelites Leaving Egypt / Wikimedia Commons

Imagine an oppressor whose victims find a way to escape their long-standing oppression. Those victims have, for a long time, been worked hard without being allowed to receive the just rewards of their labors. Many of them have been tortured and killed. Nonetheless, they have found a way to break the bonds of their oppression and find a new place to live.  When they leave the land of their oppression, they feel it is just for them to take what they believe is their due, to take from their oppressor what they need to properly sustain themselves in their freedom. Not only that, their leaders declare the justice of their actions, explaining to their oppressor, as well as to all who would listen, that their actions serve to make things equitable.

It is easy to imagine the kinds of reactions which would occur if this happened today. Those who supported the oppressed and their rights, those who supported the call to equity would be told they were “woke” and promoted “class warfare.” They would also be accused of being communists trying to redistribute wealth. They would be asked why they wanted to promote oppression, because demanding the oppressors give up what they unjustly acquired would be declared “reverse oppression.” There would be considerable effort to make the oppressors appear to be the true victims; all kinds of slogans and propaganda would be spread in order to try to preserve the status quo with all the injustices involved in it. It is easy to imagine this, because this is what is happening – and those who should know better, such as Catholics whose church teaches social justice – are suing Catholic schools which teach and support social justice as being “woke” for their support of the oppressed.

Yet, the irony of this is that the initial story is, in brief, a summary of the Exodus. Moses not only freed the People of Israel from Egyptian rule, he had them despoil the Egyptians as a way for them to take what justice would indicate was rightfully theirs:

And the Egyptians were urgent with the people, to send them out of the land in haste; for they said, “We are all dead men.” So the people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneading bowls being bound up in their mantles on their shoulders.

The people of Israel had also done as Moses told them, for they had asked of the Egyptians jewelry of silver and of gold, and clothing;  and the LORD had given the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they let them have what they asked. Thus they despoiled the Egyptians (Ex. 12:33-36 RSV).

People who embrace social justice concerns and discuss issues such as systematic racism and the ways to deal with systematic racism (such as those proposed by Critical Race Theory) understand the way systems work and promote injustice, even if particular individuals do not purposefully perform such injustices themselves . Those who unjustly benefit from such systems are the heirs of injustice, whether or not they themselves intend to perpetuate and promote such injustices. It should not be difficult for Catholics to understand this point because the principles behind it are similar to the principles behind Catholic teaching on Original Sin. Original sin is systematic sin; we are incorporated into that it at birth. Original Sin is not actual sin, though through our connection with Original Sin, we are tainted in such a way as we are inclined to sin and through our inclination, we will fall into actual sin. We can cut ourselves off from original sin through the justice of Christ, that is, incorporating ourselves into Christ and his greater justice which works to heal the injustices established by sin. Similarly, we overcome the systematic injustices by connecting ourselves to the principles of justice which lie beyond such injustices, doing what is expected by those principles. Unless we work for justice, we risk embracing systematic injustice; even when we do not personally act out every form of injustice ourselves, we find ourselves inclined to such activity and committing various forms of injustices which tie with it because of our association with and support for the systematic justice which is already in place. To deny systematic injustices such as systematic racism and try to claim we have no part of it because we do not personally commit acts of explicit racism is similar to denying Original Sin. Just because we deny the way we find ourselves connected to society as a whole does not mean we really are not connected and influenced by it; indeed, such denial lets us to accept injustice and sin much easier as we think ourselves as being perfectly good, thinking that whatever we desire must itself by good as well. Once we appreciate the teaching behind Original Sin, we will be able to appreciate how systematic injustices work, because, though each form, like systematic racism, does not represent all that comes out of Original Sin, they can be shown as a part of it. Working against such unjust structures connects us to the work of Christ, because we join in with his work to overcome all the injustices sin put into the world.

It is important for us to realize, therefore, that the society which we live in does not emerge from an immaculate past. We are heirs of injustices. Some of us suffer from those injustices while others benefit from them. It is important for us to map out those injustices and discern ways we can overcome them. Certainly, we can recognize that there was considerable good established in the formation of the United States. But we must also see that its treatment of slaves, its treatment of Native Americans, represents a kind of “Original Sin” for the country which has influenced its history because that Original Sin has not been properly repudiated and overcome. The people of the United States must not hide its  past; they cannot ignore the racism which infected the United States from the very beginning, because only by confession and penance can they overcome the sins of the nation and truly advance and follow the good which is also found in their heritage.

Oppression must be opposed. Justice demands those who unjustly benefit from oppression to renounce their ill-begotten gains and give what they can back to those who have been oppressed. Scripture confirms this in and through the story of the Exodus. It’s not “woke.” It’s not “communist.” It’s not “social Marxism.” It’s basic justice. Christians must serve justice, not injustice. They must hunger and thirst for justice. If they don’t, Jesus warned them that they risk facing the consequences of those injustices themselves.

 

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

Follow Us!
Browse Our Archives
TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
A Garden, A Kitchen, A Heaven, A Hell
The Parable of the Good Schismatic Heretic
We'll Never See the Full Epstein Files. Not...
What If… Progressive Catholics Got Their Way?
The Pretty Good Forgettable Superman
Building Up Society: The Christian Duty For Peacemaking
view all Catholic blogs