July 5, 2022

Vox Nova blogger Julia Smucker is a regular contributor to the blog of the Consistent Life Network, a pro-life, pro-peace organization dedicated to non-violence.   Here is a sample of her most recent post:

Once while taking a graduate-level test in cultural anthropology, I had a revelation of sorts. In the class, we’d been discussing what’s revealed when different cultural values come into tension. The test essay question went something like, “What would the repeal of motorcycle helmet laws say about American cultural values, and how does this relate to issues like abortion and gun control?” Seeing these three examples in juxtaposition, I realized that the preservation of human life, essentially a universal value, was clashing with something else that often takes precedence over it in U.S. socio-political discourse – not without controversy, but strongly enough to compete, and often win, against life itself. That something, I realized, is individual autonomy.

The relatively innocuous case of motorcycle helmet laws points to the likelihood that a critical mass of Americans might prefer to endanger themselves – or at least to have the choice of endangering themselves – rather than be required to use a piece of protective equipment. More recently, this has been paralleled in the forceful resistance to precautions against Covid-19, which also has the effect of endangering others. The vigorous pushback that occurs in response to any suggestion of legal limits on guns or abortion has an even more insidious effect: facilitating the direct killing of human beings.

One common defense of the value of autonomy over that of preserving life relies on the premise that the taking of life is so inevitable that it’s useless to regulate. Criminals will find a way to obtain guns no matter what, the reasoning goes, so making it harder to get one will only make law-abiding people less safe because only the criminals will be armed. Or, others argue, women with unwanted pregnancies will find a way to obtain abortions no matter what, so making it harder to get one will only make them less safe because the abortions will be done by illicit and dangerous methods.

Read the rest of her post here.

January 17, 2021

The Church of St. Timothy in Blaine, MN, in collaboration with a small group of spiritual directors and activists, has designated January 17-24 as a Week of Nonviolence for Christians. In organizing this week, they have prepared a toolkit of prayers, reflections, and action steps for us to take each day of this week that includes our national commemoration of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s life and legacy as well as a transition of political power in the United States of America. Please read the following message from the organizers, and click on the link below to access the toolkit:

This is a campaign to celebrate the Christian tradition of social justice, nonviolence, peace, and love. It is a weeklong invitation to reflect daily upon the Gospel call for love of enemy and the creation of a more just and fair society through nonviolent action in the public sphere. We seek to offer a life-affirming alternative to those who claim Christ but who have become allied with white nationalists employing violence.

Click on the link below to view a google doc toolkit with resources for study, prayer, reflection, and action, as well as images with quotations to be shared on social media, organizational websites, print material, etc. This is a free, open-source toolkit and we invite you to adapt what is here for your context (school/community/parish/small faith group). Please note that this was put together in less than a week, so thank you in advance for understanding that this toolkit is not as polished as it could be and it is also far from exhaustive.

You are warmly welcomed to forward this along to others who may wish to participate. If you are interested in adding to this resource, or if you are interested in collaboration/partnership to promote Christian nonviolence in some other way, please send an email to nonviolenceweek[at]gmail.com.

http://bit.ly/WeekOfNonviolence

January 16, 2021

I write these words in Dubuque, IA, USA, on January 16, 2021 among national concern about armed protests planned in all fifty US state capitols in response to Joe Biden’s upcoming presidential inauguration. I hope and pray that whatever happens tomorrow, there will be not shots fired, no one beaten, no lives lost…and that the following day, we will honor in peace and gratitude our nation’s prophet of justice and nonviolence, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Junior.

That said, I know my hope is not enough for the times we live in. As Rev. Elizabeth Rawlings has stated, “Prayer is being in relationship and communication with God. It breaks open our heart to the world and calls us to action. Simply stating that your thoughts and prayers are with someone is meaningless unless you are actively engaging in and with the pain and suffering in the world – and doing something about it.”

When I was a teenager, crime rates in my hometown of Buffalo, NY were very high, fueled by racism, poverty, illegal drugs and gangs. Around the turn of this century, signs began appearing outside homes around the community. Some of them said “Nonviolence Begins With Me,” while others said “I Leave Peaceprints.” This campaign to fill my city with messages of peace was initiated by Sister Karen Klimczak, a Sister of St. Joseph, who founded and administered a communal home for men recently released in prison. On Good Friday, April 14, 2006, she was murdered by a resident when she walked in on him stealing her mobile phone for drug money. Her commitment to peace and mercy were such that, fifteen years before her death, she imagined that she would die violently and actually forgave her killer. 2,000 mourners attended her funeral, and her legacy lives on.

I’ve been thinking of Sister Karen a lot lately as I witness the ever-widening political divide in this country which culminated on an attack on our Capitol building on January 6, 2021. Just one week prior, I had published an article in the National Catholic Reporter on politically divided Catholic families. I myself come from such a family, but fortunately it is also a loving family, and while we have had some heated discussions, we have not let our divergent beliefs and values come between us.

Nevertheless, political beliefs continue to be divisive for many within the Church. When I put out a call for interviews for the article in late November, I received an overwhelming response; after twelve interviews, my transcript amassed no fewer than 15,000 words for a 1500-word piece. I’d like to share some of the comments from my interviews just to offer a sense of the depth of this divide…and the varied ways that US Catholics are seeking to tolerate it and occasionally cross it.

Matt Kappadakunnel, an investment banker from Torrance, CA who voted for Biden in the 2020 election, states that we are called as Catholic Christians to be bridge-builders and to practice what Pope Francis has called accompaniment:

In 2016 when it was between Hilary and Trump, I knew I could not vote for either – I could not accept Trump, but I couldn’t support a pro-choice candidate. I voted third party knowing that my state of California would go for Clinton, but I could not vote for a pro-choice candidate.

I believe my Dad voted for Trump in 2016 on the pro-life issue, and I think my mother did too. My wife has only one living parent, her father, who was very much in favor of Trump. My wife’s brother became a QAnon follower, and in 2020 with the murder of George Floyd and the pandemic I came to a closer examination of faith, and I united with other Catholics to decide Trump should not be reelected. Also, I’m Indian-American, so the racism in his rhetoric made me very frightened. That alone made me plan to vote for whomever would take Trump out of office.

I was not happy with Biden at primaries, but his faith shined in a way that I had not seen before, and choosing Kamala Harris really spoke to me. I think my parents decided not to vote for Trump this time, especially having Harris as a running mate. My wife’s father is still a Trump supporter. My wife says, “You have a biracial grandson – you’re supporting someone who wants them to be mistreated.” My wife said she would not continue to speak to her father if he voted for Trump. My brother-in-law (my sister’s husband) was defensive of Trump.

My wife does not talk frequently with her Dad, but it created a strain. He doesn’t see his own white privilege or know how Trump’s ideologies are diminishing to his grandchildren and people of color in general. Her father ended up not voting in this election, even though he supported Trump.

My parents went with Biden because they came to believe that Trump was not as pro-life as he claimed. It’s really hard for my wife to see eye to eye with anyone who will be a Trump supporter.

Now that Trump is leaving office, I feel I can reach across the aisle more easily. Before, I hesitated talking to Trump supporters because mostly they’d talk about how great he is, how wrong the media is…Now, I feel I can connect with them about other things besides politics. If people complain about liberals, I can say, well, there were people over the last four years who had to deal with Trump though they didn’t like him; that’s how democracy works.

Now there is a call for unity and mending, but also for truth and calling a spade a spade. I don’t think I can get a Trump supporter to agree with me, but I know I should not demonize them for those beliefs when I encounter them in my parish or in young adult Catholic circles I am part of. But honestly it’s easier to navigate now that Trump is not going to be in office.

Pope Francis is advocating a Jesuit model of exchange, dialogue, sharing. I don’t necessarily have to agree with what the other person said. But one must begin with knowing this is another child of God, another person made in the image and likeness of God as a way of not demonizing or objectifying them or putting them in a box. It’s not an easy practice, but it is what Francis has called for throughout his Pontificate, and I think it is what is most relevant at this time.

Christ is a bridge between heaven and earth; we are called to be bridge-builders and receive other people who might be different. I think it will be a radical call and challenge. I think Francis wants our bishops to be bridge builders with Biden, to focus on accompaniment. He’s modeling this, calling bishops, priests and laity to follow in that model.

Vox Nova’s own David Cruz-Uribe, OFS, is a Secular Franciscan who did not vote for Trump but has contact with Trump supporters through the Knights of Columbus and his Franciscan community. He commented,

I don’t think the problem is gap between left and right. I think it’s a gap between cultural Catholicism based on American ideas, and the fullness of Catholicism. My question is how do you get a parish to build a kind of community to let these conversations happen? A lot of parish organizations have withered away…When I lived in Connecticut and now that I live in Alabama, I love the Knights of Columbus. It is just a group of men doing charitable activities. But I didn’t like it at the national level. Here, there are some women’s groups that might be a place where there is potential for these conversations.

The place where I can have more successful conversations is with my fellow secular Franciscans, and the key is that there we have built community. We develop a real sense of family, and that community allows us to have conversations that aren’t possible in the parish setting.

Anna McLellan is a pseudonym for a Bay Area educator who deals with family conflict over politics. She was unwilling to be quoted under her real name for fear of their reactions:

It’s been hurtful to feel that some of my ties with my family have been broken over politics; it’s so odd to see such a huge rift between what it means to be Catholic Christian for some people. I try to understand the other side.

I’m not Democrat or Republican; I’m not fond of either party, and I vote third party a lot. I tend to lean left on a lot of issues, with the exception of abortion; I’m conservative on abortion but don’t push for more legislation on it. The Catholics in my very large family tend to be strong Trump supporters, very vocal about it; I also have a few in my family who follow QAnon; I try to be delicate, but there is no persuading them. I try to do a gentle tug to pull them into reality, but it’s just been very hard to feel isolated within my own family; there are only a few of us who are not Trump supporters, and they’ve also felt isolated. We’ve reached out to each other for support to have a feeling of family. I’ve seen some family members on social media who have suggested violence toward people on the left. I don’t think they would hurt me, but to whom do they think a violent action would be okay?

In the very beginning, when Trump won in 2016, I tried to put myself in the shoes of Trump supporters. I was accused by liberal friends of being a Trump apologist. It was a genuine effort to understand their concerns and motives and not vilify them, to seek common ground even if we don’t agree on everything. But the more time went on, the more I saw family members starting to mirror his behavior, the less I was able to understand it. I understand overlooking that personality if you have concerns and don’t like either candidate. He’s ugly but gets the job done…But when you see that continue and escalate, and the retaliation, vindictiveness and constant insults, and when you start to justify that…I lose my ability to understand, as it seems so antithetical to be a Catholic or a Christian – it seems vindictive, retaliatory, not the way we are called to be.

I think what happens next will depend on what Biden and Harris say and do. If they engage in vilifying Trump supporters, if they make any kind of comment like Clinton did when using the term “deplorables,” it will escalate things. I think the Trump supporters will look for any reason to criticize Biden and Harris, so they will have to be above reproach. So will regular voters who supported Biden and Harris. The Trump supporters are so wounded that they are going to be looking for any reason to lash out. I think Biden will need to listen to the valid concerns of the people who voted for Trump – like employment, industry, and globalization – and try to address those. We as US Americans will have to understand we might not get everything we want, but we’re going to have to find common ground. I do worry about the right-wing extremist groups and their activity, but I hope things will settle down if Biden, Harris and their supporters take the high road.

Elizabeth Kale, a mother of five in East Dubuque, IL, voted for Trump in this election, primarily due to the abortion issue. She attends Latin Mass and finds that most of the people in her church community also voted for Trump, though she has one Catholic friend who did not.

I was baptized and received First Communion, but my mother was remarried more than once and could not receive communion. I was drawn to the faith as a child, and my grandparents made sure I understood the rosary; that is what kept me alive.  I got wild for a while as a teenager – I was promiscuous, had tattoos, was tending bar at 15, making a lot of money. I loved my life and didn’t realize I was in a state of sin. I eventually came back to the Church and made a true first confession, which changed my life. I drew close to St.Therese, got interested in the saints. I fell in love with the church. Of my own accord I decided I wanted to receive communion with a veil, not in the hand, not standing – it just came to me organically. I naturally started becoming more traditionalist without even realizing it. Going to Latin Mass, my habitual sins melted away. The community is wholesome and everyone is family.

It seems like the Democrats are trying to create a new sense of socialism. It’s the feel-good party, saying we’re going to accept everyone, but at the same time, they are slowly trying to take rights away. Trump is not the best person on the planet; I don’t put all my faith in him, but in God. I think he is the most pro-life president we’ve ever had.

Meanwhile, Democrats have shown through COVID-19 that religion is not essential while liquor stores are. As a police family, we appreciate the Second Amendment. Taking our weapons is what they do first. I feel like it is a spiritual battle; communism is Satan’s playbook. The Democratic Party’s colors show that is what they are pushing. I will not let them create a socialist world, a one-world government. If Trump is not the best person, he is pulling us back. I see the WHO and Paris Agreement are steps toward totalitarian one-world government. Trump is against that.

I want a clean world, clean water; the Mississippi River is completely polluted. I want a clean earth, but I’m not going to bow down to Mother Earth. God promised us a new body, a new earth glorified. My focus is on making sure we have the freedom to practice our faith and on saving the unborn.

My family has done the Jericho March (led by Taylor Marshall) marching around state capitols praying the rosary. We do the Divine Mercy chaplet; there may be thirty people or two hundred, with lots of moms, kids and elders. It’s been moving because people see that we are not stopping. There’s a Mary statue, a state flag, a cross. It’s been incredible, and we’ve been able to talk to people on the other side, including angry ones. We pull them in and pray with them so that they are not as hateful.  People who want to do a Trump rally are surprised when they see us praying.  One guy who’d been to a “Stop the Steal” rally said this is the most beautiful, peaceful thing I’ve been to. We’re Trump supporters but just want mercy on us and on our country.

Julett Broadnax is an 88-year-old spiritual director from Texas. She voted for Biden, and she lives with her son and his wife, who both voted for Trump.

They can’t understand where I’m coming from, and I can’t understand where they’re coming from, but we’ve elected to live in peace. We’ve developed skills of listening to each other and using “I statements” rather than “you statements.” You statements divide people. I statements are less trouble. We try to listen first, rather than formulating our comments while they are speaking. We have these ground rules, but we are limited.

I see the same divisiveness in more distant family members, and I wonder…rather than separating, why can’t we lay down some ground rules and really listen? I did that once on a pilgrimage, where a stick was placed in the middle of the room where people had to wait to take the stick back. It made for a productive experience. We’re not that formal here, but we kind of follow those rules.  It’s hard to have peaceful conversations when we are on such opposite poles in our thinking. But I think the conversation is necessary if we’re ever going to come together.

Michael P., a retired financial planner from Dallas, did not want his last name published due to concerns over potential conflict with his liberal family and friends.

I voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020 I like the fact that he’s a businessman, not a career politician. I see him as doing things that benefit the country economically. Another issue is abortion. I can’t understand Biden being a Catholic and supporting abortion. I don’t know how someone who is a Christian can support abortion. Aborted babies don’t even have a chance to live. They are created in the image and likeness of God, and they are destroyed before they even take a breath out of the womb.

I’m not in favor of capital punishment; I am for helping people who are poor and need food; I volunteer with Catholic Charities and work all the time with people who are about to get evicted. But I see the best way of getting out of poverty is by creating a good economy, which Trump was doing. Maybe people will start out in low-paying jobs, but then they can work their way up and get better jobs. I am for racial justice but believe that welfare has divided and destroyed families, adding more problems to the racism that is part of our country.

For most of my 42-year marriage, my wife has been as conservative as me. She has changed recently; she’s turned off by how Trump talks, his rudeness, how he has treated women. We just don’t talk about politics; if we do, we get worked up, so we decide it’s too divisive.

In my parish I don’t know what people think; when I have volunteered for people experiencing homelessness, I knew a few people with more of a conservative view rather than a liberal view, but we mostly do not talk about that. I am in the minority of our close friends – I’m the anomaly. Sometimes I bring it up, but I don’t want to bring that attention to myself. I don’t think I’d ruin the relationship, but they may look at me differently.

Johna Burdeos is a clinical dietitian who lives with her husband Ramón in Lake City, TX.

The Catholic Church does not give endorsements. “Vote your conscience” is as much as they will say. But I feel this is a topic to be discussed now because of how divisive Trump is. He is not like the Republican candidates we have seen before. Those could understand or appreciate people like myself, my husband or others who see gray areas.

I try to see both sides; I look at the pro-life issues as non-negotiable. But there are things Trump has done that for me are too hypocritical. How could you call yourself pro-life and then separate children from parents at the border?

I kept an open mind when he became the president. It’s gotten worse. I’m a health care worker and got COVID-19. I had it mildly and took care of myself. I have the privilege of being able to stay home in an isolated setting. But not everyone does. That made me even more frustrated with the situation of this administration – here I am, working with people who are on machines to keep themselves alive due to a virus I feel this administration has downplayed, ignored, and handled very poorly. Seeing people struggling for their own lives really made me think of life issues in a broader way.

I have a close family member who voted for Trump. I understand why people did vote for him; I consider myself a socially conservative Catholic. But at the end of the day Trump’s positive actions – against sex trafficking, for example – are not enough. On top of that it’s the rhetoric. He’s not willing to acknowledge the reality of what has happened with the election results. I’m dumbfounded that people can still support this and undermine our democracy. And if something you say on social media is flagged as untrue, you need to question why instead of escaping to an echo chamber of people who think just like you.

That is what is scary about our times – it’s easy to escape onto online platforms. My father and father-in-law could talk to their friends in the military truthfully, but now we are not able to just talk to each other, even on the phone.

My friends who are staunch Trump supporters are very frustrated with how far things are going. They were frustrated with Obama’s overreach and the removal of God from the public sphere. I tell them that we live in a world of people with different beliefs and values. We talk about the need to act in a Christlike way, to love our neighbor, and that means we also need to respect the values of others.

The thing that is difficult for some of my friends on the right is they want to talk to someone with different politics from a religious standpoint. It’s important to understand why someone has that view – it may have nothing to do with religion or God, but where they came from. This is true on both sides – we need to get to know the story of a person, to learn why they are voting as they are, to listen first before coming back with our own points.

What struck me about all of the people are interviewed was that, no matter how passionately they held their beliefs, none of them demonized the other side. They wanted common ground, reconciliation, and nonviolent communication. In the cases where relationships have been severed, they feel personally hurt.

One of my interviewees, Dominican Sister Quincy Howard, who works as an advocate in Washington, DC, mentions in the article that there are big-money interests invested in pitting people against each other, especially through social media. As true as this is, I believe that the protection of our democracy and the restoration of civility in our civil society must begin at the interpersonal level among family members and friends. This is the time to remember Dr. King’s strategy for social change as well as his vision. Regardless of what we think of the presidential transition occurring this week, may we continue to seek peace and nonviolence in all our interactions.

August 4, 2019

Every time news breaks of another public shooting, I’ve come to have the same sinking thought: “What? No, not another one.” And then I automatically say a Hail Mary, a habit I’ve adopted on hearing news of any violent or otherwise untimely death.

I have little more to add, having grown weary of trying to come up with something new to say time after time after time after time. But after a week when the US has been hit especially hard by gun violence, the leadership of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops does have something to say.

These statements – from Bishop Frank Dewane, chairman of the USCCB’s Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, with the latter two issued jointly by Bishop Dewane and USCCB president Cardinal Daniel DiNardo – diagnose the country’s gun violence problem as a plague, an epidemic against life, a social disease. They include calls for prayer and action, for legislative change and cultural change. We need all of these, and have for a long time.

Except for the references to the specifics of each tragic situation, these are the full responses.

To the shooting in Gilroy, CA:

The Lord calls us to comfort those who mourn and to be peacemakers in a violent world. We pray, and we must, for the victims and their families. The Church should act in ways that heal and support all those affected by gun violence. It is disturbing that our society would seem to allow some to feel comfort in being violent. Our legislators must make changes to our gun policy to prevent the loss of life. As Americans, we must be honest with ourselves that we have a sickness, almost a plague, with the problem of gun violence. As Christians, we must look to the cross, repentant of the ways that have led us to this point and, with God’s grace, abandon such senseless, inhuman acts. Let us resolve to make the sacrifices necessary to end the violent killing that saturates our nation.

To the shooting in El Paso, TX:

Something remains fundamentally evil in our society when locations where people congregate to engage in the everyday activities of life can, without warning, become scenes of violence and contempt for human life. The plague that gun violence has become continues unchecked and spreads across our country. 

Things must change. Once again, we call for effective legislation that addresses why these unimaginable and repeated occurrences of murderous gun violence continue to take place in our communities. As people of faith, we continue to pray for all the victims, and for healing in all these stricken communities. But action is also needed to end these abhorrent acts.

To the shooting in Dayton, OH:

The lives lost this weekend confront us with a terrible truth. We can never again believe that mass shootings are an isolated exception. They are an epidemic against life that we must, in justice, face. God’s mercy and wisdom compel us to move toward preventative action. We encourage all Catholics to increased prayer and sacrifice for healing and the end of these shootings. We encourage Catholics to pray and raise their voices for needed changes to our national policy and national culture as well. We call on all relevant committees of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to outline a reinvigorated policy agenda and pastoral campaign to address ways we can help fight this social disease that has infected our nation. The Conference has long advocated for responsible gun laws and increased resources for addressing the root causes of violence. We also call upon the President and Congress to set aside political interests and find ways to better protect innocent life.

Some will surely accuse the bishops of speaking out too much on this issue, and others, of not speaking out enough. But while it remains to be seen whether and how it will unfold into further action, I am thankful that they have spoken in this way. From a Christian perspective, this is not, or shouldn’t be, a partisan issue. For the Church’s shepherds in a society so plagued by this “epidemic against life,” it is a pastoral issue – and for all of us, a life issue.

Lord, giver of life, have mercy on us.

January 19, 2015

In response to a question from a French journalist on the plane from Sri Lanka to the Philippines, Pope Francis said something that may sound shocking to those of us from liberal societies.  I’m using the word “liberal” here in a classical sense; that is, not merely in reference to the political left, but to the over-arching social ideal of personal choice and autonomy as being among the highest goods, based on an implicit definition of freedom as essentially the right to do or say as one pleases.

“In freedom of expression there are limits.”  That’s the potentially startling comment in soundbite form, if you will.  As always, context matters, although in this case it doesn’t necessarily make it less startling to either French or American ears.  The context was a question about possible tensions between religious freedom and freedom of expression, which the pope immediately heard – and unpacked – as a reference to recent deadly attack on the office of the Paris-based magazine Charlie Hebdo in revenge for its ridicule of the prophet Mohammed.  In response, Pope Francis first of all reiterated what he has said several times before: killing in the name of God is never justified.  And he went on to add that neither is insulting other people’s faith.

Somehow, because of a slightly odd but lighthearted illustration about hypothetically punching his friend and colleague next to him for insulting his mother, the response was read by some as justifying the attack.  (more…)

July 22, 2014

I’m not usually a big fan of Nicholas Kristof, but he has written a perceptive New York Times column on the symmetry of the rhetoric on either side of the Israel-Palestine conflict and its latest flare-up.  Perceptive, that is, in a way akin to pointing out the emperor’s nakedness: stating the obvious, which is less obvious than it should be.

Here are his counterpoints to three of the “oddly parallel” clichés of the cycle of violence being thrown around yet again.

This is a struggle between good and evil, right and wrong. We can’t relax, can’t compromise, and we had no choice but to act.

On the contrary, this is a war in which both peoples have a considerable amount of right on their sides. The failure to acknowledge the humanity and legitimate interests of people on the other side has led to cross-demonization. That results in a series of military escalations that leave both peoples worse off.

Israelis are absolutely correct that they have a right not to be hit with rockets by Hamas, not to be kidnapped, not to be subjected to terrorist bombings. And Palestinians are absolutely right that they have a right to a state, a right to run businesses and import goods, a right to live in freedom rather than relegated to second-class citizenship in their own land.

Both sides have plenty of good people who just want the best for their children and their communities, and also plenty of myopic zealots who preach hatred. A starting point is to put away the good vs. evil narrative and recognize this as the aching story of two peoples — each with legitimate grievances — colliding with each other.

Without disagreeing with Kristof’s fundamental point here, I would nuance it to say that it is about good and evil, just not in the way we’re tempted to think.  That is, it is not a struggle between good and evil people, but between good and evil in people – in thoughts and words, doings and failings.  As Solzhenitsyn once said, “The line between good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.” (more…)

May 18, 2014

This weekend, I stood with my local Pax Christi chapter, as well as a sizeable number of parishioners at the church where we meet, to take Pax Christi USA’s Vow of Nonviolence.  The text of the vow is available through the above link, but I will also reproduce it in full here.

Recognizing the violence in my own heart, yet trusting in the goodness and mercy of God, I vow for one year to practice the nonviolence of Jesus who taught us in the Sermon on the Mount:

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons and daughters of God…You have learned how it was said, ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy’; but I say to you, Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you. In this way, you will be daughters and sons of your Creator in heaven.”

Before God the Creator and the Sanctifying Spirit, I vow to carry out in my life the love and example of Jesus

  • by striving for peace within myself and seeking to be a peacemaker in my daily life;
  • by accepting suffering rather than inflicting it;
  • by refusing to retaliate in the face of provocation and violence;
  • by persevering in nonviolence of tongue and heart;
  • by living conscientiously and simply so that I do not deprive others of the means to live;
  • by actively resisting evil and working nonviolently to abolish war and the causes of war from my own heart and from the face of the earth.

God, I trust in Your sustaining love and believe that just as You gave me the grace and desire to offer this, so You will also bestow abundant grace to fulfill it.

(more…)

August 2, 2013

Over at America, William Cavanaugh has a thought-provoking essay on the nature of violence. His musing is prompted by the coverage of the Chechen background of the Boston bombers – a coverage that plays up Islamic violence and plays down nationalistic violence. As Cavanaugh puts it:

“There will be no debates over the fanaticism caused by devotion to the idea of a Chechen nation, nor the violence caused by Russian insistence that Chechnya remain a part of greater Russia. Why is this so? Why does devotion to jihadism strike us as peculiarly dangerous, while the much better-armed devotion to Russian national pride strikes us as mundane and generally defensible? Why do we prefer to talk about the Tsarnaev brothers’ relation to Islam and not about their stated political opposition to the American invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan?”

The answer lies in the religious-secular divide, that central divide of modernity. Under this dominant worldview, religion is consigned to the private sphere, with civil religion taking the place in the public sphere that was once occupied by traditional religion.

This has some dangerous implications, especially when it comes to the legitimacy of violence:

“We have been habituated to think that devotion to one’s religion is fine within limits, while public patriotic devotion to one’s nation is generally a good thing. We are appalled at violence on behalf of religion, but we generally accept the necessity and even the virtue of killing for one’s country.”

And in the United States, this civil religion takes on a particularly dangerous form, as it is “based on a heavily ritualized devotion to the salvific role of the United States in world events”. Traditional religion remains strong, but subservient to – and supportive of – this modern civil region.

This leads to Cavanaugh’s main point about the role of violence:

“What is important for our present purposes is to see how the religious/secular divide functions in our public discourse about violence. It serves to draw our attention toward certain types of practices—Islam, for example—and away from other types of practices, such as nationalism. Religion is the bogeyman for secular society, that against which we define ourselves. We have learned to tame religion, to put it in its proper, private place; they (Muslims, primarily) have not. We live in a publicly secular and therefore rational society; they have not learned to separate secular matters like politics from religion, and so they are prone to irrationality. We hope they will come to their senses and be more like us. In the meantime, we reserve the right periodically to bomb them into being more rational.”

Although it is not the point of his piece, I think there is a lesson here for those American Catholics – including some bishops – who are too quick to invoke the tenets of the civil religion, especially when they talk about the constitution. Ironically, they make these arguments to support religious liberty, while they are in effect accepting the dominance of the civil religion and the concurrent private and limited role for religions like Christianity. It’s a false path and a dangerous path.

December 25, 2012

My wife and I have many customs at Christmastide.  Some are silly:  for example, on Christmas Day we always cook hotdog wraps (hotdogs in a shell of biscuit dough) for our main meal.  This started when the kids were really young:  after going to midnight mass, putting all the presents out, and then getting up at 6 AM when the kids did, we were too tired to cook the elaborate meal we had planned.  Hot dogs were quick, the kids loved them, and pretty soon it became a tradition.  Our oldest is 20 and to them this is what MUST be served on Christmas.

On a more serious note, my wife and I always listen to the following song by John McCutcheon:

This year, after the bloody massacre at Newtown, followed by the senseless killing of two firemen in upstate New York, it took on a special poignancy.   It calls to mind another time when violence was deemed necessary, when families and homes were threatened by “sociopaths” and “evil-doers”, when failing to respond with violence meant surrendering to the “enemy.”    And so the last war of European imperialism played out, leaving 16 million people dead and accomplishing little except to pave the way for the rise of Hitler and Stalin.

This drives home, for me, the point (being debated here) that our nation has placed a misguided trust in violence.  Is violence in self-defense sometimes necessary?   The Church teaches that it is, but has placed many strictures around it to make clear that it is the exception, not the rule.   As a culture, too many Americans look at these not as guidelines to turn them away from violence, but as legal obstacles to be overcome.   They are straining out gnats and swallowing camels, invoking Augustine and Aquinas and fine points of theology while turning a blind eye to the love and grace made present in the Incarnation.

In this Christmas season, we need to remember how Christ emptied himself for the sake of us sinners, so that the peace which is beyond all understanding is in our heads, in our hearts and on our lips.

December 21, 2012

President Obama got it right: we can’t tolerate this anymore.

In his speech at Newtown’s interfaith prayer vigil on Sunday, while appropriately keeping the primary focus on voicing and responding to the nation’s grief, Obama showed a hint of political courage that hasn’t been seen on the problem of public shootings from either side of the aisle for as long as I can remember:

Since I’ve been president, this is the fourth time we have come together to comfort a grieving community torn apart by mass shootings, fourth time we’ve hugged survivors, the fourth time we’ve consoled the families of victims.

And in between, there have been an endless series of deadly shootings across the country, almost daily reports of victims, many of them children, in small towns and in big cities all across America, victims whose — much of the time their only fault was being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change.

We will be told that the causes of such violence are complex, and that is true. No single law, no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society, but that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely we can do better than this.

If there’s even one step we can take to save another child or another parent or another town from the grief that’s visited Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek and Newtown and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that, then surely we have an obligation to try.

In the coming weeks, I’ll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens, from law enforcement, to mental health professionals, to parents and educators, in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this, because what choice do we have? We can’t accept events like this as routine.

Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard?

Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?

Whether this hint of courage will be realized in action of course remains to be seen.  In any event, it should not have taken a tragedy of this magnitude to get us to start publicly acknowledging that maybe we should rethink our legally mandated national firearm fetish, an all too deeply embedded piece of the culture of death that enslaves us.  Sadly, it’s too late for the 26 children and teachers who were killed last Friday.  All the more reason we need some serious national introspection now.

We need to talk about violence. (more…)


Browse Our Archives