2021-05-20T05:06:56-05:00

Last updated on: May 20, 2021 at 5:06 am   By

Thomas Hawk: Electric Chair in Blue / flickr

The bloodthirsty nature of many of those who call themselves pro-life reveals itself every time they defend the death penalty. They prove that they do not care about the dignity of life and its preservation. Their bloodlust does not allow them to think life is of inalienable value. Instead, they believe some have lost their right to life and should be put to death. It doesn’t matter if someone is innocent, if the supposed victims of an accused criminal plea for mercy, they want the right to kill, and they use the supposed justice system as the means to satisfy their lust for death. How else can one explain the lack of empathy when it is pointed out that many whose lives are snuffed out are later proven innocent? Scalia made it clear, the issue wasn’t about innocence, but following the letter of the law, proving Paul correct in saying it is the letter which kills (cf. 2 Cor. 3:6).

For this reason, it is not surprising that those who desire blood will do whatever it takes to satisfy their desire. If and when those who made the drugs used to execute people decide not to make them anymore, instead of seeing this as a sign that society as a whole does not want to promote death, those who promote capital punishment decide it is time to go back to more barbaric and cruel ways of execution, such as the use of the electric chair or firing squad. Thus, we see states making it clear, they will kill, and if need be, they will make the situation worse by having their victims choose how they should be executed. This is exactly what happened in South Carolina, where the governor signed into law guidelines which make sure no one would get in the way of the state’s bloodlust:

If execution by lethal injection under this section is determined and certified pursuant to subsection (B) to be unavailable by the Director of the Department of Corrections or is held to be unconstitutional by an appellate court of competent jurisdiction, then the manner of inflicting a death sentence must be by electrocution, unless the convicted person elects death by firing squad.[1]

While the revival of previous forms of execution are in themselves an indication of how mad our society has become, what is worse is that those who should know better, Christians, are among those promoting such actions. God is the God of life. Those who fight against life, those who cheapen life and think it is something easily taken away, take their stand against God. For God has made it clear that no one should repay evil with evil, death with death:

Repay no one evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends upon you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” (Rom. 12:17-19 RSV).

We are told that we should be kind, not cruel, for when we are cruel, we will hurt ourselves. “A man who is kind benefits himself, but a cruel man hurts himself” (Prov. 11:17 RSV). This is true, not only on a personal level, but for society as a whole. When society is cruel, it will also hurt itself.  For it will be promoting cruelty as a good, and in doing so, will perpetuate cruelty. The death penalty does not save the world from cruelty, it does not protect the world from violence, but rather, it perpetuates violence as it promotes and establishes violence as a good. Christians should know that the solution, the way out of the cycle of death and violence, is the promotion of restorative justice and mercy. This, after all, is the message of the Gospel: God became one of us to save us, not to condemn and destroy us for our sins. It is only a Satanic hate which would promote annihilation as the solution to sin.

Pope Francis preached that “every act of violence committed against a human being is a wound in humanity’s flesh; every violent death diminishes us as people.”[2]  Every time society engages violence, every time it attacks and kills someone when there are other, better options, society violates the dictates of justice and so wounds itself by promoting injustice over justice, especially if it calls such injustice, justice. How can society be stable when it cuts itself away from justice? It should be no surprise that those who embrace injustice become people of the lie, using all kinds of lies to justify further injustice, and when that does not work, they will use brute force to keep themselves in power. No society established or preserved by such means can last.

Society must reorient itself. It must promote life, helping those in need, helping the poor and the oppressed. It must recognize every life is of value, and no life should be needlessly snuffed out. Central to this reorientation is the rejection of the death penalty:

The firm rejection of the death penalty shows to what extent it is possible to recognize the inalienable dignity of every human being and to accept that he or she has a place in this universe. If I do not deny that dignity to the worst of criminals, I will not deny it to anyone. I will give everyone the possibility of sharing this planet with me, despite all our differences. [3]

So long as the death penalty is accepted, the value of life will be denied; but when it is rejected, then we begin to see society recognizing the value of all life, that no one is viewed as undeserving of basic rights. When life is truly appreciated, then things will change. The poor will not be mistreated for being poor; migrants and refugees will not be denied their rights; systematic structures of sin, such as those which underlie racism, will be taken down.

Christ has shown Christians the way. Sinners need to be healed. Justice needs to be restorative, not retributive. Punishment should work for the good of all, including, and especially, the good of the criminals. This is why Pope Benedict XVI told us prison reform is important: “Moreover, it is important to promote a development of the prison system which, as well as respecting justice, is increasingly adapted to the needs of the human person also by recourse to punishments alternative to imprisonment or to different forms of detention.”[4] Forgiveness must be possible; just as we like to be forgiven for what we have done, and the opportunity to change for the better, criminals must likewise be given that opportunity as well. It can even be given to those who do not yet ask for it because of their hardened heart: “If forgiveness is gratuitous, then it can be shown even to someone who resists repentance and is unable to beg pardon.”[5] This does not mean we will forget what has been done, because we will not; that is why we will  work for restorative justice, for in restoring the good which someone lost due to their sin, instead of snuffing out what good remains in them, we know they have done wrong and that something must be done to counter that wrong. But it also means we do not forget the good which remains, the good which serves as the foundation by which such restoration can be had, the good which is forgotten by those who know no mercy or worse, who are bloodthirsty and desire death.

“Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath! Fret not yourself; it tends only to evil”  (Ps. 37:8 RSV). We must as a society no longer accept vengeance and the anger which demands vengeance as the foundation for justice. We must forsake bloodlust and the wrath which it promotes. We must recognize the evil of such actions. We must no longer call such evil, good. We must recognize that those who follow through with their bloodlust, whether they are in positions of power and authority, or a part of the underclass, follows through with the same evil. The solution to that evil is not the promotion of further evil, but the greater good. Justice demands satisfaction, yes, but the satisfaction must be restorative, or else, all that will be established is further injustice as more and more people believe the lie that bloodlust is good and society as a whole will crumble away in its promotion of death.

[1] South Caroline General Assembly, Bill 200 (124th General Assembly, 2021-2022).

[2] Pope Francis, Address of Pope Francis at the Reconciliation Liturgy (9-8-2017).

[3] Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti. Vatican translation. ¶269.

[4] Pope Benedict XVI, Pastoral Visit to Rebibbia District Prison (12-18-2011).

[5] Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti. Vatican translation. ¶250.

 

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!

2021-01-04T07:51:33-05:00

Last updated on: January 4, 2021 at 7:51 am   By

johnhain : Martin Luther King Jr / pixabay

It’s common for those criticizing social justice efforts to accuse those promoting social justice as being Marxists (either as socialists or as communists). Sometimes, various Marxists join in social justice causes, when the cause connects with a Marxist desire or objectives. But that doesn’t make social justice Marxist, for there are more than Marxists involved with social justice activities. Indeed, while they can work with Marxists for common goals, many involved in social justice activities nonetheless denounce Marxism as well, seeing Marxist ideology also gets many things wrong and would also end up promoting various forms of social injustice.

Those who engage social justice come from a wide variety of beliefs and practices. They can work together when they seek for a common goal, but when their goals diverge, they likewise, diverge from each other and go their separate ways. The fact that some of them are Marxists does not make them all Marxists, and indeed, if one examined what was being said and done by all those working together for a common cause, that would be made clear. The reasons they offer for doing what they do will differ. Yes, they will have some things in common, the same way a tank will have much in common with an automobile, but the differences, when investigated, will show how and why many engaging in social justice cannot credibly accused as being Marxists, even as an automobile cannot be credibly claimed as being a tank.

Those who enjoy unjust privilege in society, those who will be asked to put aside that privilege but do not want to do so, like to associate the whole of social justice with the Marxists, knowing the way people have been trained to fear Marxism without really knowing what Marxism is all about. Marxism has become a boogieman – accuse someone of being a Marxist (or socialist or communist), and that is enough for many to have them dismissed without giving them a hearing. Marxism is assumed to be totally and completely wrong, and anyone who is accused of being a Marxist, associating themselves with Marxists, must therefore also be rejected. If someone accused of being a Marxist denies it, their association with potential Marxists is seen as proof that they are lying, and are secretly Marxists. If only our education system taught people logic and logical fallacies, they would be able to detect the kinds of fallacies employed by such arguments, which would include but not be limited with guilt by association, poisoning the well, and  ad hominem.

Christians, because of the atheistic materialism associated with Marxism, cannot and will not agree with everything Marx and Marxists teach. They will, however, find many elements which they stand in agreement with Marxists, and this should not be a surprise, since Marxism borrowed much from Jewish and Christian traditions. Many of the criticisms, many of the issues, which Marxists raise, Christians can and should raise. Scripture is concerned with the plight of the poor and the oppressed. Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, solidified that concern. Jesus warned the rich that what unjust joys they have now can and will be taken from them. Those who are mistreated and ignored will be the first in the kingdom of God. The oppressed find God is by their side, and the oppressors either have to change their ways and repent, or they will suffer the consequences of their oppression. This is what promotes Christian engagement with social justice. Because the concerns Christ raised are similar with the concerns that Marxists raise, Christians should have no problem working with Marxists insofar as they raise those concerns together, and work on solutions which both sides think just. Marxist atheism, Marxist materialism, of course, will be denied, though even then, not all that Marxists say need to be considered wrong: many abuse religion and use it to oppress others and Christians should see that as a problem and work to correct it. Nonetheless, this would not make such Christians who do this as being Marxists, for they will still have fundamental differences with Marxists, differences which the Christians will make clear even when working with Marxists. Thus, when Martin Luther King Jr. acknowledged elements of Marxist criticism and worked with communists, he preached that Christians could not be communists:

Now, let us begin by answering the question which our sermon topic raises: Can a Christian be a communist? I answer that question with an emphatic “no.” These two philosophies are diametrically opposed. The basic philosophy of Christianity is unalterably opposed to the basic philosophy of communism, and all of the dialectics of the logician cannot make them lie down together. They are contrary philosophies.[1]

Martin Luther King Jr., despite making it clear that he could not and would not support communism because it diverted greatly from the Christian faith, nonetheless was constantly accused of being a communist. Thus, when FBI files concerning Martin Luther King Jr. were released, we find that this was indeed one of the claims being made about him:

It alleges that King’s political ideologies and the creation of his civil rights organization, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, were heavily influenced by communists, specifically the Communist Party USA. The FBI document went into great detail about one of King’s most trusted advisers, Stanley Levison, a New York lawyer and businessman who served as a top financier for the Communist Party years before he met King in 1956.[2]

Here, we see the tactic used against social justice leaders was used against King. He was “influenced” by communists. He had close associates who were communists. So, it was easy to accuse him of being a communist, ignoring what he said and did to the contrary. He was critical of capitalism, like communists, so he must have been a communist. However, it is clear King’s response against capitalism was similar to that of his response against communism. He thought Christianity went beyond both, and to embrace one or the other would lead to grave problems in the world. Those who were challenged by his criticism of capitalism and the exploitation which took place under capitalist regimes found the easiest response was to accuse him of being a communist, ignore his words to the contrary (or claim he was lying), and hope that would be good enough to derail his pursuit for justice.

This tactic continues to be with us today. Within the Black Lives Matter movement, we find a diverse group of people, with diverse beliefs and practices. And yet, we see the movement as a whole as being labeled as a communist movement by its critics. They point out how some members of the Black Lives Matters movement connect themselves with Marxism, thereby equating everyone in the movement with Marxism.[3] But, as Tom Kertscher reported for PolitiFact, the movement is diverse, and what brings the people together is their rejection of racism and the oppression and abuse which follows such racism: “But the movement has grown and broadened dramatically. Many Americans, few of whom would identify as Marxists, support Black Lives Matter, drawn to its message of anti-racism.”[4]

Black Lives Matters transcends any individual person in the movement; it is about fighting for the dignity of the human person, of all human persons, by dealing with and fighting those who have suffered grave indignities, those whose lives have not been treated as if they mattered, because they were African Americans. Of course, those with privilege, those who fear justice, will demean the movement and call them Marxists because of Marxists within the movement, hoping that will derail the movement; but those who suffer injustice do not care about such ideological fights, and far from going away, they find every new instance of such injustice only fuels their desire for justice, recognizing that those who would stand in their way with false claims about the movement only act as oppressors normally act, justifying themselves through lies, proving the need for the movement itself.

Sadly, Christians, far from having a united front against social justice, find themselves fighting each other, some promoting social  justice, following Scripture and the Christian moral tradition, and others fighting against social justice, following privilege and the ideologies which they have been led to believe. Christians who speak out against racism, those who promote the objectives of Black Lives Matters, find themselves attacked as communists, just like Martin Luther King Jr. did, and their work is said to be too controversial to be supposed by Christian organizations. Thus, when Gloria Purvis showed her support to the objectives behind the Black Lives Matters movement, that is, to overturn and reject the place of racism in society, she found herself silenced, and accused of being a “leftist” or “Communist” because she promoted social justice. Her show was let go from EWTN, and those who resist social justice, rejoiced, saying she was too controversial, promoting “leftist policies like reparations….”

How did social justice, and with it, repairing the harm done by sin, become “leftist?” Christian theology teaches that those who sin must make restitution for what they have done. Reparation for sin is a part of the process of penance.  The Pontifical Council for Peace and Justice made this point in 2001:

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. [5]

Pope Francis, likewise, stated the need for those who have sinned, those who have harmed others, to repent and help repair the harm they have done to the world; reconciliation is important, and we need to be able to come together and even forgive each other, but that forgiveness does not remove the need for reparations; rather reparation is included in reconciliation:

Let us renounce the pettiness and resentment of useless in-fighting and constant confrontation. 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. [6]

Racism is a grave sin, a grave injustice. It destroys lives. It destroys the dignity of the human person. “Racism is a virus that quickly mutates and, instead of disappearing, goes into hiding, and lurks in waiting.”[7]  To confront racism, we must admit the harm it has done, the harm it continues to do. Then, we will recognize that to overcome racism, we must do more than stop people from overt racism, but also, we must fight hidden racism, systematic racism, which tries to keep the power structures formed by racism remain in power. We must truly heal the damage which racism has brought to the world. Those who reject the need for restitution for the crimes of racism, those who reject reparations, end up promoting racism, because they continue to support the privilege racism gives to those in power.

Catholic media, far from being silent on racism, far from being silent on systematic racism, far from being silent on the need for reparations in order to bring about a just society, needs to be at the forefront of the work for justice, working to help restore the dignity and livelihood which racism has taken away from many within society. Thus, Pope Francis, speaking to those involved with Catholic media, said:

We need media that can help people, especially the young, to distinguish good from evil, to develop sound judgments based on a clear and unbiased presentation of the facts, and to understand the importance of working for justice, social concord and respect for our common home. We need men and women of conviction who protect communication from all that would distort it or bend it to other purposes.[8]

Social justice, which includes confronting racism and healing the damage done by it, must be a part of the message given by Christian media. Instead of promoting outrageous claims of communism, socialism, or Marxism, against those who work for social justice, instead of firing those who follow Christ in promoting justice for the oppressed, Christian media must promote those who do such work and raise their voice further. When some Christian media source works to silence such voices and encourage disingenuous attacks on social justice, such media must be seen, not as working for Christ and Christ’s ways, but as an imposter, and indeed, as being the one who truly supports an anti-Christian ideology which must be rejected. Insofar as they fight against the teachings of the prophets, the teachings exemplified by the Sermon on the Mount, so-called Christian voices stand not with Christ, but against him, serving the spirit of the anti-Christ.

Christians must promote social justice. They must work with all those of good will, including those who hold positions contrary to their own, so long as doing so will work to promote the common good. This is how Christians should get things done in the world. They are not meant to flee the world and let it get worse; rather, they are expected to bring God’s grace to the world, helping to perfect it through that grace. That is, after all, what God did with the incarnation.

[1] Martin Luther King Jr, “Can a Christian Be A Communist? Sermon Delivered at Ebenezer Baptist Church” (9-30-1962). Found at: https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/can-christian-be-communist-sermon-delivered-ebenezer-baptist-church

[2] Kristine Philips, “In The Latest JFK Files: The FBI’s Ugly Analysis On Martin Luther King Jr., Filled With Falsehoods,” in The Washington Post (11-4-2017).

[3] While it is true some suggested they were trained in Marxist thought, that is not the same as saying they were Marxists, let alone indicating the whole movement was Marxist.

[4] Tom Kertscher, “PolitiFact: Is Black Lives Matter a Marxist Movement?” in Tampa Bay Times (7-22-2020).

[5] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, “Contribution To World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia And Related Intolerance.” Vatican translation (Durban, 31 August – 7 September 2001). ¶12.

[6] Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti. Vatican translation. ¶97.

[7] Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti, ¶78.

[8] Pope Francis, “Message To The Catholic Media Conference Sponsored By The Catholic Press Association.” Vatican translation.  (6-30-2020).

 

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!

2020-12-21T04:07:52-05:00

Last updated on: December 21, 2020 at 4:07 am   By

Geralt: Social Media / pixabay

“So,” Peter tell us, we are to “put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander” (2Ptr. 2:1 RSV). For many of us, this can be rather difficult, not because we believe such things to be good, but because our passions often get the best of us and turn us away from the charity which we know we should follow. From time to time, anger rises up in us. Without thinking about what we are doing, we react against those whom we believe have done us some wrong, speaking out and fighting them in ways which are not helpful anyone. Malice, guile, insincerity, envy, and slander are all possible results of that anger. Through such anger, through the harm which we felt we have received, we end up excusing ourselves and our passions; though we have been wronged, we let anger and other similar passions take control of us so we respond in a disproportionate manner to the harm which we have suffered, making the situation worse as those who are at the receiving end of our spite push back against us with similar disproportionate responses, using the same kinds of justifications as we give for ourselves. Thus, we see that the response to our response increases the anger, the hurt, the suffering, which, if not stopped in some fashion, well  end up becoming a never-ending, continuously intensifying cycle of pain and sorrow for all involved.

We must always try to speak, not only with the facts as we understand them, but in charity, for the truth transcends mere facts. If we want to have the truth, we must engage the fact which we know with such charity that we let the truth shine through them. Facts without charity leads us towards gossip, and gossip leads us away from the as it slowly devolves from facts to assumptions and lies, allowing emotion and opinion to establish what is said and done instead of the truth itself.

What is good is true, and what is not good, is not true. What is evil presents to the world some distorted representation of the truth; evil clouds and obscures the truth in order to justify itself. Lying is intrinsically evil, and intentionally lying to create discord, to harm others and their reputation, or in order to gain an unjust advantage over others, certainly can be classified as being a grave matter and potentially mortally sinful. Richard Rolle, a fourteenth century hermit, rightfully warns us against such talk:

Now gossipers and slanderers who injure other people’s lives by malevolent talk, and those who esteem their own condition above all others, or who despite any condition which a man would find salvation in, have no more vision of the love of God in their soul than the eye of a bat has of the sun, because flippant talk and nasty remarks are the sign of an idle and malevolent nature which is emptied of God’s grace, while someone whose words are always kind, and who consider every person better than himself, revels clearly that he is constant in virtue in his principles, and full of charitable feelings toward God and his neighbor. [1]

We should always try to be graceful in our speech, using it to make things better, even for those whom we dislike. This is not to say we must ignore injustice, never speaking about it or those who commit it. Rather, when we are called to speak, charity must remain at the forefront of our speech. It is not easy. It never has been easy, but social media makes it worse, as social media allows us, indeed, encourages us, to respond, not with forethought, not with charity or compassion, but in ways to lift ourselves up at the expense of those we criticize. It encourages snark instead of truth. Through social media, we often are moved by passion, not reason, and through such passion, we reveal the worst thoughts and attitudes we have to the public. When we become embraced by others for doing so, we find ourselves encouraged to continue on, to act out of contempt towards others, to act out of malice and so ignore the dictates of truth which require all such words to be said in and with charity. Though not all such talk is composed of direct lies, lying becomes easy and encouraged in such a forum, and once we give in and justify such lies, we have truly lost the love of God in our soul.

We must try to do better. “But now put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and foul talk from your mouth” (Col. 3:8 RSV). We must fight against the deadly sin of wrath, and all the malice which comes from it. Again, this is not to say we must avoid speaking against injustice, for when we encounter injustice, we must do what we can to fix it; but we must do so with justice ourselves, lest we become unjust in our attacks against injustice and only end up making things worse. We must not hate – we are to love our enemies, though such love does not mean we should ignore or forget what others have done; if they have done evil, exposing it is a way to help them as much as it is to help their victims. But such exposure must be done properly. It must be done in charity. It must be done in truth. When we speak out against what others have done, we must speak only what we know, and not exaggerate or lie about it. Lying is always the quick and easy way out, but once those lies are exposed for being lies, then everything else we have said becomes suspect, so that even whatever truth we have said will be doubted, allowing for injustice to continue without obstruction.

We must not cause unjust injury to others. We must consider the words we say. Idle words spoken in haste lead us astray. If we find ourselves speaking without charity, if we find ourselves letting anger take us over, even if we have good cause for our anger, we must try to put a stop to such speech. Anger can motivate us and direct us to fight against injustice, but we must put it under our control instead of being controlled by it. If we find ourselves overcome by social media, we might need to take a break from it, and begin to look into ourselves, to see where all the anger and spite is coming from, and do what we can to get rid of it before it becomes a cancer in our soul. Social media can be good, once we have gained control over ourselves; we can meet and engage many people, which is a good thing. But we do so with full charity, lest we find ourselves becoming that which we dislike, succumbing to one of the great temptations of our current age.

[1] Richard Rolle, “The Commandment” in Richard Rolle: The English Writings. Trans. and ed. Rosamund S. Allen (New York: Paulist Press, 1988), 144.

 

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!

 

2020-11-18T04:13:24-05:00

Last updated on: November 18, 2020 at 4:13 am   By

12019: Contemplation of Justice / pixabay

Often, those who write on or discuss the need for government to work for the common good, that is, those who write on social justice, are told that charity should be not regulated by the government. That is, they are told that we should be free to choose for ourselves whether or not we will be charitable. Of course, the problem is that such a response confuses charity with justice. It suggests that many defects of justice can only be and should only be met by charity.[1] But if we followed this suggestion, justice would be denied, because where such charity is not given, people will continue to suffer from injustice. Charity is important, and invaluable, and it should not be discounted. It should be done out of love. But we should not use charity as the sole means to replace what is lost with injustice, for then we would end up undermining justice; charity should, instead, supplement and go beyond the expectations of justice.

It is interesting to note that many of those who say we cannot dictate charity, confusing charity for justice, have no problem telling others what to do with their private lives, indeed, have no problem having the government involved with such actions; what they dislike is having government work for the common good, to fix social imbalances which cause some people to be oppressed and others to have undue privileges. They are like the Pharisees Jesus criticized when he said, “But woe to you Pharisees! for you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others” (Lk. 11:42 RSV).

Jesus was clear: justice should not be neglected. Although he not provide a systematic discussion on government and how it could and should work for justice, he often spoke on the principles by which we can and should determine what is or is not just. His silence on government was not because he denied government and its role in defending justice, but rather, he expected his followers would understand the basic principles concerning government and how it should work for the common good if they studied the Law (the Torah) and the Prophets. This is because the Law and Prophets spoke of and embraced the common good, telling government that they must enforce justice and not treat it merely as optional charity. They warned authorities that if they did not embrace the common good, they would and suffer the consequences of their actions. Charity should not be used as the only way to deal with the problems of injustice. The enforcement of justice is not optional.

No greater example of this can be found in the Torah than the establishment of the Jubilee:

A jubilee shall that fiftieth year be to you; in it you shall neither sow, nor reap what grows of itself, nor gather the grapes from the undressed vines. For it is a jubilee; it shall be holy to you; you shall eat what it yields out of the field. In this year of jubilee each of you shall return to his property. And if you sell to your neighbor or buy from your neighbor, you shall not wrong one another. According to the number of years after the jubilee, you shall buy from your neighbor, and according to the number of years for crops he shall sell to you. If the years are many you shall increase the price, and if the years are few you shall diminish the price, for it is the number of the crops that he is selling to you.  (Lev. 25:11-16 RSV)

The Jubilee was not demanding charity from those who were told they were to forgive the debts of others, but rather, it was working for and enacting a principle of economic justice, to make sure that the just distribution of goods was not hindered due to economic hardships. The Jubilee made sure that there were regulations in place to help those in need, to make sure the hardships associated with debt did not go on infinitely. These regulations were expected to be enforced by those in power. What many now would treat as an issue of charity (forgiveness of debts) was expressly demanded by God, and government was expected to make sure the rules were followed.

The Torah, the Law, did not stop with the Jubilee. There were many regulations put in place which were expected to be followed and enforced by authorities, rules which many today would suggest fall under the category of charity, because they no longer have any proper understanding of justice. And yet, it was such justice which was expected by God, such justice which was demanded by the Torah and such justice which the rulers over the people of Israel were expected to enforce:

You shall appoint judges and officers in all your towns which the LORD your God gives you, according to your tribes; and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment. 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. 16:18-20 RSV).

Foreigners should not be oppressed (cf. Lev. 19:34; Lev. 24:22; Deut. 24:14). This is because justice promotes the rights of all those who are in need (and not just those who are citizens of the land in which they are in). Thus, the Torah demanded that Israel, and its authorities, to look after the needs of orphans, widows, and foreigners, just as they were to look after the needs of the Levitical priesthood:

At the end of every three years you shall bring forth all the tithe of your produce in the same year, and lay it up within your towns; and the Levite, because he has no portion or inheritance with you, and the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow, who are within your towns, shall come and eat and be filled; that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands that you do (Lev. 14:28-29 RSV)

In this way, we find Scripture dictating what many consider is to be done only out of charity, showing that what many consider to be a choice, is not, but a duty commanded by God: “For the poor will never cease out of the land; therefore I command you, You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in the land” (Deut. 16:11 RSV). Again and again, if we look through the Torah, we find justice required the people of Israel, and its authorities, to take care of others, such as when it said that some of the food grown in farms must be put aside and given to the sojourner and the poor:

When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field to its very border, neither shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest.  And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the LORD your God. (Lev. 19:9-9 RSV).

The Torah was not giving us suggestions, showing various ways in which we can be charitable to others; rather, the dictates given by the Law were expected to be followed by the people of Israel, and enforced by their rulers. When those in authority failed to meet these expectations, when they denied justice and hurt those who were poor or needy themselves, the prophets rose up, spoke against them, and warned them they would face the consequences of their injustices if they did not change their ways and once again promote justice:

Thus says the LORD: “Go down to the house of the king of Judah, and speak there this word, and say, `Hear the word of the LORD, O King of Judah, who sit on the throne of David, you, and your servants, and your people who enter these gates. Thus says the LORD: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the alien, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place (Jer. 22:1-3 RSV).

Ezekiel, of course, tells us it is not just the rulers, but the people of Israel who failed to do what was right. “The people of the land have practiced extortion and committed robbery; they have oppressed the poor and needy, and have extorted from the sojourner without redress”(Ezek. 22:29 RSV). That is, the people of Israel had followed the example of Sodom, undermining justice by their selfishness: “Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, surfeit of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty, and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them, when I saw”  (Ezek. 16:49-50 RSV). Just as Sodom was destroyed because its people refused to follow justice, God warned the people of Israel that they, too, shall suffer loss if they did not repent. Thus, through Isaiah, God declared:

Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right, that widows may be their spoil, and that they may make the fatherless their prey! What will you do on the day of punishment, in the storm which will come from afar? To whom will you flee for help, and where will you leave your wealth? Nothing remains but to crouch among the prisoners or fall among the slain. For all this his anger is not turned away and his hand is stretched out still (Isa 10:1-4 RSV).

Throughout the prophets, we find a common theme: when the people of Israel, and her rulers, turn away from justice, they have turned away from the covenant of God and will not receive its blessings. Justice was not optional. Helping the poor and needy was not merely a thing of charity, but expected and demanded of the people of Israel. Those who undermined justice faced God’s wrath, though of course, they could repent, and so receive his mercy. “Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your doings from before my eyes; cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; defend the fatherless, plead for the widow” (Isa. 1:16-17 RSV).

Oppression must be overcome, not as an act of optional charity, but as an act of justice. This principle, established in the Law and Prophets, was not repudiated by Jesus. Rather, it was a basic principle which he expected his audience to know and already understand. Those Christians who would suggest that the principles of justice must not be enforced, for that would undermine charity, are the ones who undermine charity, for they undermine the foundation upon which charity is to be given: charity goes beyond justice, and so it should not limit or impede justice. To support charity requires us to accept justice, otherwise, there is no charity, for charity wants what is best for all, while justice seeks to grant all a basic level of dignity for all. Scripture does not tell us we can ignore the role of government and its work for justice; rather, it shows the demands of the common good must be met by government, or else, the injustice will build up and harm all who find themselves in a place which such justice is denied.

[1]  This is because those who make this argument, still want to punish people for various crimes, and so use the government to enforce some forms of justice.

 

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!

2020-10-11T03:16:39-05:00

Last updated on: October 11, 2020 at 3:16 am   By

Dennis Jarvis: Ruins of the St.Sophia Cathedral where the Seventh Ecumenical Council was held in 787 AD. Iznik, Turkey /flickr

The Seventh Ecumenical Council, Nicea II, convened in 787, and officially declared the use and veneration of images to be acceptable to the Christian faith. The fathers of the council followed the lead of St. John of Damascus and others who had defended the use of images against those iconoclasts who not only rejected their veneration, but said they should not be made. Iconoclasts had destroyed many ancient images so as to enforce their ideology unto the church. The council established the official dogmatic response to the iconoclasts, declaring them not only to be mistaken, but heretics. Nicea II contributed much to the history of Christian theology, helping to promote a greater understanding of the consequences of the incarnation, for as God became man, so the invisible creator became personally visible in the form of Jesus Christ. In doing so. God affirmed the use of images by making an image himself, for by becoming visible, he has an image, and that image can then be duplicated and used in order to help us reach out to and seek after him.

While, dogmatically, the fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council gave the church the answer which it needed, iconoclasts continued to hold positions of power. A new iconoclastic period soon emerged and many of the fathers from Nicea II became confessors and martyrs of the faith. This shows us that the council, while authoritative, was not immediately successful, for it did not put a stop to iconoclasm but only reinforced the battle lines between those who supported and used icons and those who did not. Indeed, in Byzantium, it soon seemed that the council was repudiated and not to be believed. This is common with many ecumenical councils: they foster resistance, and that resistance often seems to hold on and be stronger than the supporters of the councils themselves; if we are to look at the immediate aftermath of a council, it would be easy for their critics to say such councils were failures and did not hold dogmatic authority. The first Council, at Nicea,  led to a major Arian resistance which took centuries to overcome. Chaos came after Nicea as theological battle lines divided Christians from each other. And yet, dogmatically, its teachings were necessary, just as much as other councils, which often spoke to and dealt with problems of their time, problems which did not immediately go away just because the councils provided theological answers to them.

History shows us we must look at more than the way councils answered dogmatic questions; we must also look at how those answers slowly made their way to the faithful and became truly lived out and believed. When we see that, we should not be surprised if and when an ecumenical council is called, it might not be immediately heeded, and it will take time to work out the spirit of the council to determine how those answers work and why they were needed. To reject a council because of  the “chaos” and dissention afterward will only lead us to dismiss all councils, because all councils are surrounded by such chaos and resisters.

Councils, then, have “thorns” which they have to deal with. Dissent causes people to reflect deeper on the message of a council, to make sure the spirit of the council is heeded instead of ignored, to keep the fathers of the council humble, just as St. Paul himself experienced a thorn at his side which kept him humble:

And to keep me from being too elated by the abundance of revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, to harass me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I besought the Lord about this, that it should leave me;  but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me (2 Cor. 12:7-9 RSV).

While the fathers of the seventh ecumenical council were elated with the temporary support icons received within Byzantium, they soon learned that they could not and should not be triumphalist about it. They could, of course, glorify God in icons and give glory to God for his triumph, but they had to deal with the ramifications of the iconoclastic controversy and deal with those who would reject their council and once again seek to destroy images. They could boast in Christ, in the accomplishments of Christ, and point to the incarnation as the guarantee that what they declared was true: but, to expect that meant that getting everyone to accept the council would be easy would be delusional.

Dealing with contention is not easy. Christ tells us, while speaking about truth, and promoting justice, we must keep mercy in mind, and so deal with our enemies with mercy:

And as you wish that men would do to you, do so to them. “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the selfish.  Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful (Lk. 6:31-36 RSV).

Love for others, including our enemies, must always be done with justice; when we see people doing wrong, we want them to change their ways and do penance for the harm they have done. We must not overburden them with penance and make them despair so that they do not change their ways, but we must not think being merciful means we cannot speak out against them, fight against the evil they promote, and not expect them to make reparations for the harm they have done. Instead, it means we must not act out of a desire for vengeance; we must seek justice, with a desire for their reform and salvation, while of course, we must always be concerned with those they have harmed and show mercy to them as well, a mercy which includes trying to fix the wrongs they have suffered.

Forgiveness and mercy are not cheap; they come with a price, the price of reform, and to be merciful to those who have done wrong is to seek their reform, not to ignore the harm they have done. The fathers of the seventh ecumenical council sought the conversion of iconoclasts. They desired such iconoclasts would turn away from their error and join in with them in the restoration and veneration of image. Likewise, when the second iconoclastic period was over, the church once again sought those who struggled against images and find a way to have them join with the rest of the faithful, to recognize the way icons connect us with God and the saints already joined with God. So we, too, should seek to make converts from our enemies, showing them love, a love which can sometimes be tough as it expects much from such converts, and yet, however tough it is, the love contained within makes it just and not cruel.

 

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!

2020-10-08T06:11:32-05:00

Last updated on: October 8, 2020 at 6:11 am   By

The White House: Trump at Walter Reed Sick With COVID19 / flickr

When it was declared that Trump was sick with COVID19, because they have grown not to trust him and what he said, many people doubted it, and many continue to doubt it. But, every indication seems to suggest it is true. He can be seen to have difficulty breathing. Those around him are catching COVID19. It is spreading, and spreading hard and fast, with those in his immediate circle.

It is easy to say, “they deserve it, this is justice.” There is, to be sure, some poetic justice, seeing those who showed little to no concern about COVID19, who showed little to no attempt to protect themselves and others from it, become infected by it. But, we must remember, they are not the only ones who will be hurt from it. Many innocent people who have come in contact with them have been and continue to be put in danger. Is that justice?

No. Justice is not the right word. It is, however, indicative of the problem with COVID19 and why it should be taken seriously. It is also one reason why we should care, and actually be concerned about, those who have been infected by it, including Trump: not only for their own sake, but also for the sake of those they would otherwise put in danger. We should hope and pray for their fast recovery. We should pray for far more than that. We pray they have a change of heart, metanoia. We should pray that their contact with COVID19 gives them a sense of their own mortality, will now take COVID19, and other plights seriously. We should pray that if they come out of the crisis which they now face, they will seek to undo the damage they have done to the United States and the world so as to actually work to make the world a better place.

Obviously, not everyone, when faced with death, will change their ways; many see their temporary victory over death as making them super-human, and so, double-down with what they were doing before they came close to death. They see it as a sign that they are special, instead of taking it as a warning that they, like everyone else, will have to face the consequences of their actions.

Knowing the potential for Trump to take a victory over COVID19 as a sign that he should continue to do as he was doing before he was sick, we still need to hope for his recovery,  not because we like him or what he will do if he recovers, but because he is human, made in the image and likeness of God The life he has, like any life, is good. We must not wish death on anyone. We pray for mercy. “For our civil authorities and all our armed forces, let us pray to the Lord.” Lord, have mercy. Kyrie eleison. Hospodi pomiluy.

This call for mercy is a call for the Lord’s mercy. Where the Lord is, there is mercy, but where he is, there is also justice. We hope his mercy realizing that with that mercy, justice will be found. The two go together. Asking for mercy from God indicates we want his help for justice. We put our hope in God that with that mercy, God will find a way to work out justice. We do not have to be pleased with those we pray for; we do not have to accept what they have done or what they stand for. Praying for them, praying for mercy for them, includes praying that they shall experience the pull of justice in their lives. It means we hope that, where necessary, they will change their ways. It is also hope that if they will not, that with that mercy, God will find a way to work out justice through them despite their resistance to it.

Is this not one of the lessons we find in the Lord of the Rings? When Frodo told Gandalf that he wished Bilbo had killed Gollum, Gandalf replied that no one should wish for anyone’s death. Frodo learned what that meant when he met Gollum; like Bilbo, he took pity on Gollum. Frodo even came close to having Gollum change, to redeem him; despite that failure, the mercy of Bilbo and Frodo allowed Gollum to have a major role in destroying the Ring. Gollum did not change his ways; in the end, he betrayed Frodo, but even in that betrayal, the mercy which was shown unto him became a vessel for justice.

When we show pity, when we preserve life, we must trust that some good will come out of it, even if we know the person to whom we show mercy might turn on us and leave us for dead.  Praying for mercy, praying that someone should live when they face death, means we put our trust in God, and that he will find a way to work out his justice.

We must pray for all, seeking the salvation of all, including those in high positions:

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:1-4 RSV).

We are called to pray for the salvation of all, we are called to pray for God’s mercy upon all, because even the greatest sinner is made in the image and likeness of God. Everyone has good in them. When we pray for mercy, we pray especially that such good, no matter how hidden it has become due to sin, can be released. So long as there is life, there is hope. We must remain people of hope, and with that hope, have faith and hope for the salvation of all, for we know Jesus worked for the salvation of all:

Faith has untold power to inspire and sustain our respect for others, for believers come to know that God loves every man and woman with infinite love and “thereby confers infinite dignity” upon all humanity. We likewise believe that Christ shed his blood for each of us and that no one is beyond the scope of his universal love. If we go to the ultimate source of that love which is the very life of the triune God, we encounter in the community of the three divine Persons the origin and perfect model of all life in society. Theology continues to be enriched by its reflection on this great truth.[1]

No one is outside of the scope of God’s love. No one should be outside of the scope of our love. This is not to say we cannot and must not resist the evil that people do. We must. Praying for mercy, praying for the restoration of life for those who are sick and close to death does not mean we should ignore the evil they have done, or the evil which they continue to do. We must resist evil, but that resistance must always be done with mercy and love. We resist evil. We seek to put an end to it. We must do so, but we must do so correctly. We must embrace justice ourselves, and follow the dictates of justice. We must not embrace evil to fight evil. We must not become monsters to fight monsters, rather, we must fight monsters with truth and goodness. We must resist them when they are in power, and that includes, finding ways to legitimately take that power away from them. Praying for mercy for those who are in positions of authority includes praying that they will be stopped from doing evil, for being stopped from doing evil will do them good. Thus, Pope Francis says:

Nor does this mean calling for forgiveness when it involves renouncing our own rights, confronting corrupt officials, criminals or those who would debase our dignity. We are called to love everyone, without exception; at the same time, loving an oppressor does not mean allowing him to keep oppressing us, or letting him think that what he does is acceptable. On the contrary, true love for an oppressor means seeking ways to make him cease his oppression; it means stripping him of a power that he does not know how to use, and that diminishes his own humanity and that of others. Forgiveness does not entail allowing oppressors to keep trampling on their own dignity and that of others, or letting criminals continue their wrongdoing. Those who suffer injustice have to defend strenuously their own rights and those of their family, precisely because they must preserve the dignity they have received as a loving gift from God. If a criminal has harmed me or a loved one, no one can forbid me from demanding justice and ensuring that this person – or anyone else – will not harm me, or others, again. This is entirely just; forgiveness does not forbid it but actually demands it. [2]

Praying for Trump, praying for people in authority, does not mean we look for the preservation of their place in authority. It means we hope for the preservation of their life so that they can change their ways. If they will not, our prayer for mercy includes the hope that justice will be had, that oppressors will lose power. It is also a hope of mercy for us. When we pray for those in authority, we pray for mercy, praying, that is, such authority will be used for the common good, or that those who have authority will lose it if they plan to continue to promote injustice with their power.

“Live as free men, yet without using your freedom as a pretext for evil; but live as servants of God. Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor” (1 Ptr. 2:16-17 RSV). Donald Trump is sick. He faces death, if not now, then soon. We must pray for mercy, for him, for us, for everyone. We pray for mercy. We pray for justice. We pray, indeed, for life, for all  life, including his. If he survives, let us continue to pray for mercy, a mercy which is just and swift; and if he succumbs to death, let us pray for mercy, for him, for his loved ones, and also for the United States and the world so that, once again, justice can reign supreme. We must not ignore mercy. But we must not neglect justice. The two go together. Seeking mercy must not be used as a pretext for evil, even as praying for those in power must not be seen as excusing us from resisting them when they promote evil.

[1] Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti. Vatican translation. ¶ 85.

[2] Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti, ¶ 241.

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!

2020-06-18T09:44:14-05:00

Last updated on: June 18, 2020 at 9:44 am   By

ksh2000: I Can’t Breathe / pexels

“I can’t breathe.”

George Floyd, in saying these words, spoke for all of us.

“I can’t breathe.”

This is the experience of so many minorities in the United States.

“I can’t breathe.” That is, “I am oppressed. I am suffering. I am being cast aside. I am suffocating in oppression. I am dying.”

We must recognize that these words speak of the fate of all of us if things do not change soon. We all will find out “I can’t breathe,” if the systematic evil and oppression which underlies racism continues to have power and control over all the earth.

“I can’t breathe,” will be what we all feel as the earth is corrupted and destroyed, with its natural resources and animal life is deplete. “I can’t breathe” is what we will all feel when climate change and environmental destruction reaches its peak impact.

“I can’t breathe.” Therese are prophetic words, which is why the cry of George Floyd resounded with so many of us who care for and seek justice in the world. It is the cry which was heard all around the world because it is the cry of the world, of the people of the world, which so many of us already feel, and which many of us know will be felt even more in the days and months and years to come unless the systematic evil and oppression which dominates the world is overturned.

“I can’t breathe.” We must note these words are first and foremost the words of the African American community. While they speak for all of us, and warn us all of what is to come, unless the system itself is changed, we must not ignore the reason why they come out of the African American community. “I cannot breathe” is their experience. So many of us have, in our privilege, experienced far less of the domination and suppression than they have experienced. We must recognize that they are the first among us to experience it, and so, they must also be given preference when restitution is made if and when we transform the system.

“I cannot breathe.” The cries of the oppressed grow in strength and more and more people realize those words are their words, those words are the warning of what is to come because it is expresses what so many of us already experience today. More and more people will feel that they cannot breathe as those in power continue to take what they can from those who have less power, and this is why many who previously were not interested in social justice and transforming the system are now interested in systematic injustice. It has become personal. But as late comers to the problem, they must listen to those who have experienced it all their lives, or worse, those peoples who have experienced it for generations, and follow their lead, instead of trying to take the lead themselves, because, otherwise, they risk changing the system of oppression with new people in power instead of dismantling the system once and for all.

Racial justice and environmental justice go hand in hand. Racial abuse destroys lives, just as environmental abuse destroys lives. And, those who suffer at the hands of racial exploitation and abuse are also those most likely to be the most adversely affected by environmental exploitation and abuse. “I cannot breathe” not only connects the two together, but shows how the horrors of racial injustice is only being exponentially made worse as a result of environmental injustice.  Thus, as racial injustice often causes those abused and exploited to be poor, the words of Pope Francis in Laudato si’ must be recognized as having implications in relation to racial justice:

Climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day. Its worst impact will probably be felt by developing countries in coming decades. Many of the poor live in areas particularly affected by phenomena related to warming, and their means of subsistence are largely dependent on natural reserves and ecosystemic services such as agriculture, fishing and forestry. They have no other financial activities or resources which can enable them to adapt to climate change or to face natural disasters, and their access to social services and protection is very limited. For example, changes in climate, to which animals and plants cannot adapt, lead them to migrate; this in turn affects the livelihood of the poor, who are then forced to leave their homes, with great uncertainty for their future and that of their children. [1]

We can see the truth of us, not only in the destruction wrought in Flint, Michigan, where the populace cannot even drink, but also in the way the environmental impact of oil pipelines affects Native American reservations. The rights and dignity of minority groups are ignored for the sake of the plans and desires of the rich and powerful. Despite growing interest in racial and environmental justice, those in power, like President Trump, are doing all they can to ignore the plight of the oppressed and continue to destroy their environment, and with it, their lives, so they won’t breathe or drink or eat in the future. And, sadly, the Supreme Court of the United States has indicated its support for Trump, as can be seen in its recent decision allowing for an oil pipeline underneath the Appalachian Trail:

The Supreme Court ruled Monday in favor of a pipeline company in a dispute about whether a new 600-mile natural gas pipeline could cross underneath the Appalachian Trail on federal land.

The 7-2 decision overturned one part of a lower court decision that had blocked construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, which is being jointly developed by Duke Energy and Dominion Energy.

The proposed pipeline would run from West Virginia to population centers in Virginia and North Carolina. In central Virginia, the pipeline would cross hundreds of feet underground beneath the Appalachian Trail where the trail runs through the George Washington National Forest. [2]

Here, we see the spread of environmental destruction, moving further into new lands, new places of the powerless and the poor; previously, many of these same people would not have been concerned when oil pipelines were being built under Native American lands, but now, because they helped reinforce the power of the oppressors, they find they will suffer the consequence of their own injustice. This is not to say they should, because no one should. But this shows how and why many people understand the need for environmental and racial justice only have they experience such injustice themselves. They must be shown, however, that the work for justice must be for more than themselves; they need to be shown how the system itself has been set in place, and how systematic racism and its support helped create and establish further systems of oppression. Then, they will be able to be shown that to fix the problem, systematic racism and all such systems of oppression must be dismantled together. The poor and vulnerable of society must work together, for together, they experience the suffocation of oppression. This means those who had not seen others as their brothers and sisters must finally do so, for it is only coming together, and recognizing the dignity of each other, can the system of abuse be dismantled. If not, then the system will create worse and  worse oppression, worse and worse destruction of the earth, until at last, the destruction will lead to mass extinction throughout all the earth.

The Trump Administration’s actions are the actions of those who like to dominate and control others. This is why it is not surprising that, as many are not paying attention because they are dealing with the COVID19 pandemic, it continues to dismantle protections which are needed for the protection and safety of us all, as Rebecca Leber reported:

Under the cover of the pandemic, the Trump administration has been hard at work dismantling the rules that protect public health. He has reversed standards for clean cars and mercury emissions from coal plants. He’s suspended rigorous environmental reviews required by the Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Policy Act to expedite approval of highways and pipelines in 30 days. And just last week, the Environmental Protection Agency altered how it calculates the lives saved from cleaner air—a devastating change that will be used to undermine future clean air regulation.

These rollbacks do not affect everyone equally—they’re particularly devastating for people of color. And the pandemic has intensified the burden that vulnerable neighborhoods already carry. On Tuesday, in a hearing before the House Energy and Commerce committee, environmentalists and racial justice advocates detailed the compounding effects Trump’s rollbacks and pollution has on communities that have been hardest hit by COVID-19. [3]

“I can’t breathe,” now joins in with the “I can’t drink,” of Flint Michigan. Soon, we will hear “I can’t eat.” Destruction is all around us. The system of oppression, as all such systems, has greater, more direct impact on the most vulnerable among us. But it does not end with them. Soon, we will all experience, “I cannot breathe,” as the system which accepted the execution of George Floyd will accept the execution of all of us; it is willing to sacrifice us all if we do not put a stop to it. We must recognize what we have let come in place. Now is the time to dismantle it. The earth and all its creatures need us to finally be good stewards of the earth. There is still time. There is still hope. But we must recognize that as the situation is dire, so is the call to change urgent. If we don’t do what we can and should do now, soon it might be too late and the destructive forces which we have let loose will take all of us with it.

[1] Pope Francis, Laudato si’. Vatican translation. ¶25.

[2] Becky Sullivan, “Supreme Court Says Pipeline May Cross Underneath Appalachian Trail,”  NPR (6-15-2020).

[3] Rebecca Leber, “Trump Is Using the Pandemic to Undo Environmental Rules. It’s Hurting Black Americans,” Mother Jones (6-10-2020).

 

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!

2020-05-15T12:57:29-05:00

Last updated on: May 15, 2020 at 12:57 pm   By

Jess Hawsor: NYC, anti-xenophobia poster amid coronavirus pandemic, Canal St, 6 Line / Wikimedia Commons

Pope St. Paul VI, in Octogesima Adveniens, spoke against racial injustice:

Among the victims of situations of injustice – unfortunately no new phenomenon – must be placed those who are discriminated against, in law or in fact, on account of their race, origin, color, culture, sex or religion. [1]

When bigotry leads to discrimination and abuse of various people, whether by law or by the way society treats them, it must be denounced.  The dignity of the human person is undermined when such injustice is allowed to continue and those who benefit from it prosper.

We must recognize that bigotry can find itself in systematic forms, such as in the structures of society which promote and enforce racism. While those with power and privilege gain from such abuse, systematic racism undermines justice, and with it, the bond which we share with each other because of our common human nature:

Racial discrimination possesses at the moment a character of very great relevance by reason of the tension which it stirs up both within countries and on the international level. Men rightly consider unjustifiable and reject as inadmissible the tendency to maintain or introduce legislation or behavior systematically inspired by racialist prejudice. The members of mankind share the same basic rights and duties, as well as the same supernatural destiny. Within a country which belongs to each one, all should be equal before the law, find equal admittance to economic, cultural, civic and social life and benefit from a fair sharing of the nation’s riches.[2]

Everyone should have a fair share of the resources of the world; this is exactly what Catholic teaching indicates with its talk of the universal destination of goods. This is true, of course, not only of money, but also of all the needs of the human person, including and especially, healthcare. If particular communities suffer more from the lack of healthcare resources and protections which help keep people healthy, the system which allows for that injustice must be changed. At its root is a sin which ignores the plight of those in need. If we find that those who have the healthcare resources they need, and feel secure because of it, pressure those who do not have them to act in a way as if their lives do not matter, then we see a breakdown of justice in society which indicates the need to change the structures of society which allow for such an abuse.  And when it is clear that this breakdown can be seen along racial lines, then it is clear, racism is involved with this injustice.

Gaudium et spes is very clear: we have a duty to deal with the fundamental injustices which are perpetuated in society, especially when such injustice is founded upon ignorance and malice:

It is now possible to free most of humanity from the misery of ignorance. Therefore the duty most consonant with our times, especially for Christians, is that of working diligently for fundamental decisions to be taken in economic and political affairs, both on the national and international level which will everywhere recognize and satisfy the right of all to a human and social culture in conformity with the dignity of the human person without any discrimination of race, sex, nation, religion or social condition. Therefore it is necessary to provide all with a sufficient quantity of cultural benefits, especially of those which constitute the so-called fundamental culture lest very many be prevented from cooperating in the promotion of the common good in a truly human manner because of illiteracy and a lack of responsible activity.[3]

Society, with all its rules and laws, exists for the common good, which means that the rules and laws put into place must likewise serve the common good. When particular rights are rejected, when human dignity is ignored for some, society itself suffers. Even if it means some must sacrifice various privileges, various comforts which we have been accustomed to enjoy, society must do what it can to change the system to make sure everyone receives the basic benefits which any given society should give to all its members.

All of this this relates to the COVID-19 pandemic. We see before us many people who feel they are not at risk from the virus (despite the fact they are). These people have demonstrated to us that they do not care about others. They ignore social distancing, wearing of masks, and other necessary changes in behavior because they do not want to give up their own personal luxuries.[4] As long as they think only others will suffer the consequences of their actions, they do not want to be told what to do (though they have a history of telling others what they can and should do, and indeed, with the way many of them are arming themselves and going into protests which shut down governments, they are already trying to dictate to others what they think others should do).

We must accept that, for the time being, we might have to give up some of our luxuries if we want to survive as a nation. For, the point is not just about saving our own lives, but that of others, of those who are the most vulnerable. We must take care of each other and work for the common good. We must not sacrifice our morality.

When looking to those who are most affected by COVID-19, either by the disease itself, or in the way society deals with and treats the disease, we find several minority groups are those who are most adversely affected by the pandemic. Instead of ignoring them, thinking they are “someone else,” those who are not a part of those groups must remember that people within those groups are their neighbors. If they claim to be Christian, they should listen to Christ who told them to care for their neighbors as themselves. But even if they are not Christian, it is a generally accepted principle that we should all treat others as we would like to be treated. This is how we keep society just. We must look out for each other, otherwise, we will all suffer the consequences when the rule of law and justice is overturned.

Beyond the elderly and those with various pre-existing conditions, such a diabetes and asthma, we find several groups experiencing the blunt of the effects of the virus, including:

We have become more aware of the racism and xenophobia found in our society as a result of the pandemic. Sadly, because we do not see a proper response to such bigotry and the injustice it causes being offered by those in charge (indeed, we see many leaders promoting it), we see a rise of a violent white nationalism which uses an ignorance of the risks associated with the pandemic as the grounds it can use to promote its agenda. White nationalism has historically used various conspiracy theories to promote its agenda, and so, it is not surprising, we see the same type of conspiracy theories employed by those who want to reject those policies needed to deal with the pandemic. Thus, white supremacists are actively involved with the various protests against the lockdowns in the nation,  and they are using the fears of those who do not appreciate and understand the ramifications of COVID-19 to promote the ideologies which keep systematic structures of abuse in effect. For who will be those who will have to risk their lives, if they are forced to go to work, but those who are already suffering the most from the virus, and already have little to no resources given to them to deal with it?  We can see this already happening when we look to the way Native Americans, who find themselves more at risk from the virus, are being told they cannot protect themselves and their reservations from those who would bring the virus into their land.

Racism is revealing itself in the way COVID-19 is being treated, but also in the way people refuse to accept the reality of the threat itself. So many see it as an issue for “others,” not for themselves. If they are not a member of one of the groups which are most affected by the pandemic, at this time, they feel they do not have to worry about it and even dictate to those who suffer from it how they should just sacrifice themselves because of how little value they hold to the dignity of human life of such “minorities.” The Christian response must be one which rejects such racism. It must be one which recognizes the need to care for our neighbor, to look after the vulnerable, and not put any extra burden on those who have already received the blunt of social burdens. The underling systematic racism found in the United States, far from being repudiated in the past, has shown itself to be as destructive as it is thriving today. Christians must not, cannot accept this. They must recognize everyone deserves protection. Everyone should be helped. Everyone should be cared for. We must not ignore the needs of others just because it requires more from us than we are used to giving. Social justice demands we reform the system, and that means those who have in excess must be willing to give up that excess to those who are in need

 

[1] Pope St. Paul VI, Octogesima Adveniens. Vatican translation. ¶16.

[2] Pope St. Paul VI, Octogesima Adveniens, ¶16.

[3] Gaudium et spes. Vatican translation. ¶60.

[4] It is amusing to see those who demand others “go to work,” are the ones who do not want to do the real work which needs to be done. That is, one of the many aspects involved with an irresponsible response to the pandemic is sloth, with people trying to find all kinds of excuses to excuse themselves from their own responsibilities.

 

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!

2019-09-19T09:59:32-05:00

Last updated on: September 19, 2019 at 9:59 am   By

Leonhard Lenz: Greta Thunberg am Fronttransparent der FridaysForFuture Demonstration am 29. März 2019 in Berlin /WikimediaCommons

The young Swedish environmentalist, Greta Thunberg, has not only made a name for herself for encouraging environmental activism in the world, she has also made a great number of enemies who like to belittle her in the cruelest of ways possible. They degrade her, not only for her age, but for her gender. It’s not only Greta, other women, like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, working hard to help protect the planet from our abuse, not only because of immediate concerns that pollution causes, but because of the wanton destruction of the environment could bring the cataclysmic demise of humanity, who face extreme misogynistic abuse from climate change denialists.

There is, on record, a connection between misogyny and climate change denial. The language used by its critics to demean environmentalists is the language of dominance and control.  The same mentality which justifies abuse of the earth is the same mentality which thinks others (women, foreigners, even animals) must be put under control in order to remain in power. As Alice Cherry pointed out, perhaps there is no better current demonstration of this then the actions of Donald Trump:

The correlation between misogyny and anti-environmentalism is perhaps most dramatically illustrated by the current occupant of the White House, who, for all of his supposedly maverick tendencies, displays contempt for both women and the environment in near-perfect patriarchal fashion.[1]

Those who possess money and power claim they possess them by right, but because those rights are challenged, all those who would change their authority must be forced to accept their dominion. The way others are treated, the way they are demeaned, is all a part of the process of self-justification for unjustifiable wrongdoings. It is the same kind of reflection which is used to justify environmental destruction. All kinds of force, all kinds of abuse, is acceptable as a means of holding power. What is at issue is the notion of supremacy and the kind of control mechanism needed to retain it.

Women, children, animals, foreigners, and land, all have been historically seen as existing in some subordinate position to the men in power. For those who want to retain that control, or rather, re-establish it, the desire is to return things to the way they were in the past, using romantic notions of the past as a means to get even those who would otherwise be harmed by such changes to accept what such supremacists promote. This is why “the rule of law” is often the means by which such supremacy is enforced, because, as history shows, this is exactly the way subordination was enforced:

Women, children, and animals have long suffered abuse in the face of the law. Historically, these three groups shared a legal status of significant subordinacy or, worse, of property. The law for centuries reflected common societal perceptions of hierarchy, depriving these groups of rights or significant legal protection, and thus served only to perpetuate and entrench their vulnerability to abuse and maltreatment. [2]

While wanton abuse of subordinates might have been frowned upon by the most benevolent of those in positions of authority and power, the system itself gave less consideration and protection to such subordinates, making abuse not only common, but protected by the law. They were put together, and continue, in the minds of many, to be together, so that when a challenge arises due to gender, race, or environmental concerns, such challenges are ridiculed as being insignificant. The law, so long as it justified such supremacists, was itself claimed to be supreme.

It should not be surprising, therefore, that many in the “alt-right”  want to employ the worst examples of history as the way things should be in the future. Abuse of others is normative for them because it is through such abuse they demonstrate their supposed superiority. Anyone who is concerned about human rights and the obligations which come from them are seen as an extreme challenge to the system which they believe is God-given. Indeed, religion is a tool for them, as they use it to justify a hierarchy in which they come out on top. Bad arguments and ideas from the past are brought back and used once again. When a particular religious figure, who might otherwise be holy, made some bad argument, that argument is promoted, turning what might have been a poor opinion from the past into a terrible ideology in the present. They can find ways to undermine all those who are considered “other” than themselves and those who they think represent the “best of humanity” (which is often white males). As Stephen Webb explained, the way “human nature” was described in the past can be and is often useful for such supremacists as they find ways to subordinate and dominate others:

Indeed, theories of human nature, propounded by men, are anxious to distinguish and separate the human from the animal. These very qualities also have been used by men to separate men from women. Like animals, women have been deprived of basic rights because of supposed biological differences from the ideal animal, the male human being. The connection between women and animals are more than symbolic. Women are thought to be closer to animals, in part because they maintain animal functions (reproduction and child rearing). Female skills are assigned to the instinctual and thus do not deserve proportionate rewards. Women are frequently allocated jobs that are dehumanizing in their routine and status. For example, most of the approximately 54,000 nonunionized North American meatpacker workers are Hispanic or African American women with a high school education or less. This job is considered one of the most dangerous in the United States. The most opposed segment of the population is chosen to carry out the destruction that consumers do not want to face. Our domination of animals is mediated so that we can obtain immediate gratification without any hesitation or guilt.[3]

Any attempt to return to a so-called Golden Age in the past is merely a reconstruction of the past which misses ignores much of the past itself, including and especially, the checks and balances which led social revolution and changed things for the better.  In this way, the reconstruction of the past as an ideology in the present makes for things to be worse than they were in the past. Such ideology often sheds itself of the benevolence needed to overcome the shortcomings of any particular system.

Christians, when witnessing any malevolent force trying to overturn the advances promoted by social justice, must resist it following the teachings of the Christians faith. They must love others, just as they must recognize that in Christ Jesus there is no “other” gender or race, so that when they see the old social order has been transcended, they recognize such transcendence as being in accord with the teachings of Christ. Likewise, Christians must recognize, contrary to all notions of supremacy, we must act in self-giving love which seeks to raise others up instead of stomping on them and pushing them down. While it is often said patriarchy is the source of these problems (because patriarchy is the way in which such notions of human nature were introduced), we must be careful and not replace it with another faulty system of subordination and domination which allows for and will bring back the same terrible ways (just under a new ideological perspective): patriarchy is not the only issue, but only a representation of the greater issue, of the natural tendency to form destructive systems of abuse and structures of sin to reinforce such abuse. This is not to deny the faults of patriarchy must not be acknowledged, because they must be; it is an important representation of where we have come from, the most immediate context in which supremacy has arisen, and what we see many continue to desire (as can be seen in the way  “toxic masculinity” not only exists, but is causing wanton destruction around us today).[4]

This, then, is what confronts us today. We are living in a time in which the environment risks being destroyed, and with it, humanity as a whole. We risk destroying our own home, the planet Earth. Those who understand this, even if they are imperfect, often receive the blunt end of toxic masculinity with its attempt to deride others in the way it knows how to do so:  this is why they often “feminize” the opposition and then treat all such “feminine” as objects to be controlled and dominated (for they think such feminization represents inferiority). The Earth, itself, is feminized as a part of their fetish, allowing them to justify their “rape” of the Earth.

Paul, who sometimes is used by those possessed by the spirit of toxic masculinity and its common associates in the right, nonetheless fundamentally undermines their position in the way he reorganized all people under Christ (cf. Gal. 3:28). Women, like St. Thecla, could be co-workers (and not subordinates) with him in the spread of the Gospel. They were to be treated with respect and helped, as he wrote to the Philippians:

I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the Lord.  And I ask you also, true yokefellow, help these women, for they have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life  (Phil. 4:2-3 RSV).

And, of course, it is not just women, Paul understood all things were being elevated by Christ, so that it was once subjugated and dominated and abused, but with the coming of the children of God, it is to be elevated and its subjugation overturned:

 I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.  For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God;  for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of him who subjected it in hope;  because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God  (Rom.  8:18-21 RSV).

The Christian message from the beginning has always been against the claims of subjugation and abuse. This is why God is always shown throughout Scripture as a God promoting the rights and needs of the oppressed. Jesus said that the rich are to fear the consequences of their avarice while the poor will see themselves raised up to the kingdom of God. Any attempt to return to a system of pure domination and control, especially once which seeks to undermine the dignity of the earth, or any creature of the Earth, is a return to the system of sin which Christ came to override. It is not Christian (even if so-called Christians promote it).  And, following the prophetic way God called for his followers to help all those who are unjustly mistreated and abused, especially when they are following, like Greta Thunberg, the justice which God expects Christians to act in support of all the abused in the world today. When someone is seen to be undermined for their support of justice, the Christian response must be to lift them up and work with them, hoping beyond hope, to help mediate God’s saving grace to the world at large.

 

[1] Alice Cherry, “Invisible Climate Wars, Part I: Climate Destruction as Gender Violence” in Climate Defense Project (May 2, 2017).

[2] Vivek Upadhya, “The Abuse of Animals as a Method of Domestic Violence: The Need for Criminalization,” in Emory Law Journal vol. 63. No. 5 (2014): 1165.

[3] Stephen W. Webb, On God and Dogs (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 55.

[4] “But this scramble for dominance and denial of emotion comes at great cost. It blunts men’s awareness of other people’s needs and emotions, drives domestic and sexual violence, makes aggression look like a reasonable way to solve conflict, forbids seeking health care (and even thinking about seeking mental health care), and pours fuel on the fire of drug and alcohol abuse,” Ellen Hendricksen, “How To Fight Toxic Masculinity” in Scientific American ( Jul. 26, 2019).

 

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!

2019-08-09T06:00:06-05:00

Last updated on: August 9, 2019 at 6:00 am   By

Fibonacci Blue: Free Our Future. Families Belong Together. Abolish ICE. March and Day of Action / Flickr

Many of Trump’s policies, and the actions undertaken to enforce his policies, are cruel. There is no way getting around it. And cruelty seems to be the point. From all appearances, he does not care about the people he hurts so long as it gives him more power (or money). The crueler he is, the more power he seems to possess, the happier he is. Certainly, inspired by his base, and his own background, the cruelty is directed towards those he thinks are powerless to resist him, such as foreigners and the poor. Mexicans, African Americans, and Arabs are all potential victims of his actions.  Through executive orders and the Department of Justice, Trump is creating a hostile situation for many Americans and would-be-Americans alike. For those who would say that Trump is President, and so what he says is law and should be accepted, they would be like those false prophets who proclaimed peace to the kings of Israel instead of the prophets who warned the kings that they shall face the consequences of their actions:

Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right, that widows may be their spoil, and that they may make the fatherless their prey!  (Isa. 10:1-2 RSV).

Those who are kind and generous will be rewarded, while those who are cruel, will have their cruelty rebound upon them and cause them harm, if not during their temporal life, then in the afterlife. This is why, even if it seems that evil prospers, Scripture reminds us that “A man who is kind benefits himself, but a cruel man hurts himself” (Prov. 11:27 RSV). Those who are cruel hurt themselves because they establish the means by which they will be judged.

The poor, the needy, the foreigner all are among those who God has specifically established as deserving our kindness and aid:

Thus says the LORD of hosts, Render true judgments, show kindness and mercy each to his brother,  do not oppress the widow, the fatherless, the sojourner, or the poor; and let none of you devise evil against his brother in your heart  (Zech. 7:9-10 RSV).

Christians, seeing the harm done to those who are in need, if not the outright cruelty done to those Trump seems to despise, should follow with the Psalmist and say, “May he [God-HK] defend the cause of the poor of the people, give deliverance to the needy, and crush the oppressor!” (Ps. 72:4 RSV).

Many migrants are dying as a result of Trump’s policies. A Chaldean Catholic man, who came to the United States in his youth, was deported, sent back to Iraq. He was a diabetic who could not speak with other Iraqis: as a result, he died, in part because he could not get the insulin he needed to treat his diabetes. Instead of protecting him and helping to make sure he could survive, the Trump administration failed him, leading him to his unjustified death.

May God defend the cause of the migrants.

May God defend the cause of the children who suffer as a result of ICE raids. We must not look away: we must look to the poor innocent children suffering at the hands of Trump’s policies.

May God defend the cause of the poor who have lost health insurance, or those who foolishly take on junk insurance policies that Trump has approved, not realizing such insurance will do little if nothing for them when in need.

May God defend the cause of those whom Trump encourages disrespect and abuse.

Trump’s day of reckoning is coming, and with it, the reckoning of the United States. His cruelty has already created a trade war with China, and though the people of the United States might not realize it, the consequences of his tariffs are going to be severe.  Farmers, certainly, are going to pay dearly for Trump’s actions. But what affects farmers will affect the rest of the United States, and so it will not be long until the rest of the United States feels the dire, if not deadly, effects of Trump’s poorly executed economic fight with China.

Even though it is prophetic to speak out against Trump’s actions and warn his followers of what is to come, it really does not take a prophet to foresee what will happen to the United States, and the rest of the world, if the madness of Trump is not stopped. Sadly, his supporters are unwilling to listen. They do not care, even if they are the ones who are hurt from his policies.

Things are not getting better. Since Trump is doubling down on his cruelty, those who seek goodness and justice must triple their efforts to resist him, not only to stop him from further harming the future of humanity, but to repair the damage which has already been done. If Trump escalates his cruelty, his resisters must escalate their response, lest the damage which has been done ends up be little in comparison to the damage which he does in the future. His instability, his lack of empathy, threaten the welfare of the world. It has long been time for the people of the United States to see the danger which is Donald Trump. It has long been past time for the people of the United States to come together and finally deal with the existential threat which lies before them and the rest of the world. We will be remembered and judged for what we do. Will we stand with Trump and his belligerence, ignoring the dictates of justice and mercy, or will we stand with goodness and truth, seeking to overcome the harm which Trump has brought to the world?

“He has showed you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” (Mic. 6:8 RSV). Justice is not had in the following of unjust decrees and cruel actions. It is found in the promotion of the common good. If Trump will not support the common good, we must not, indeed, we cannot support him. If we do, we will find ourselves joining with him in the judgment which is to come.

 

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
New Study—The Mental Health Benefits of the Rosary—SOUL...
Prophets And Justice: A Reflection On Modern Injustices
5 Life Lessons from Squid Game You Probably...
The Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul, Apostles
Apart From Me
Embracing Inclusivity: Lessons From Peter and Paul
view all Catholic blogs