  |
|
|
Dialogue Now
that the media has tattooed 911 on our corporate psyches and
the president has launched us into a plan for perpetual warmaking,
it is once more time to get serious about the alternative.
When there is relative peace in our country, we Christians
don’t need to think much about the radical teaching of
the Prince of Peace, who calls us to follow a way unlike
that of the violent, loveless world. We often don’t need to
be converted or to convert others to these ways until the
unforeseen war is upon us. So
let’s talk about it. This issue is devoted to the subject
of peacemaking. That’s
peacemaking, not pacifism. Suddenly,
since last September, everyone is asking us if we are a pacifist
church. In the broadest possible sense, I suppose we would
be aligned with pacifists. But if I have my history right,
pacifism is a chronically weak political movement that first
got organized in the early 1800’s. Christians were always
involved in it, but it was not necessarily about Jesus, The
pacifist movement has always been about the logic of not blowing
people up and wrecking the world with war. Jesus
says, “Blessed are the peacemakers,” and I’m sure he is pleased
with pacifists, too, as far as they go. But we are not just
part of political movement. We are citizens of the kingdom
of God empowered to deliver peace with God from the God of
peace. To
many people, pacifism implies passive-ism. (Although Ghandi
and ML King are hardly passive, even though they were premier
pacifists). That’s why I prefer to insist on the term “peacemaker.”
It is closer to what I think Jesus was trying to get across.
And it implies the deliberate action he was trying to teach.
Love, forgiveness, reconciliation are all very hard, very
active, very downright bloody. Listen to what the Bible says
again. Seek
peace and
pursue it. (1
Peter) Do
not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with
good . (Romans) Jesus
says: “Peace I
leave with you; my peace
I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives.
Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.”
(John) Jesus
says: “Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do
good to those who hate you and pray for those who persecute
you.“ (Matthew) Our understanding of how you live joyfully and redemptively in a violent neighborhood or as part of a violent country may still be in process. But I do think I know that it isn’t about merely being part of a political movement, and it sure isn’t about being passive. Peacemaking
requires the Spirit of God and it requires a lot of action.
So let’s talk about it. In
this Issue, Mike helps us think through 9-11. Megan helps
us think through alternatives to punitive thinking. Patrick
brings up the sore subject of what causes a lack of peace
in Philly. Pam digs deep to explore how we get the spiritual
strength to make a difference. And MCC supplies us with basic
training. As
always, the rest of the dialogue is up to you. Ed. Rod White Like
a Garden Without Water (Isaiah 30) I love our gardens. I look forward to springtime when we can
plant. I enjoy summer afternoons sitting and smelling the
wildflowers. I even like to get those little bugger weeds
out so they don’t kill the vegetables. Unfortunately, I don’t
know much about gardening. I’m hoping to learn about plants
and how they grow; hints and strategies. For instance, it
would make sense that ‘pole beans’ grow up a ‘pole’. We could
have staked a pole for them to climb, but it didn’t seem important.
They became ground cover, producing not one bean, shooting
around other plants, mixing in with weeds and growing out
of control. We got it almost right. We were so close. Bean
salad was one step away, but we blew it… big time. This
poor crop turnout was the result of a few things. Although
I had good intentions, I was not faithful in either my knowledge
nor my practice. The pole beans would have grown better were
there a pole, AND if I watered with some regularity. The garden
of violence in this country is also out of control. Although
we may have started with good intentions, our lack of knowledge
and faithfulness have led to an unproductive crop growing
wildly out of control. I
read in the newspapers (though I do take corporate media with
a grain of salt) the other day about three, maybe four kids
getting arrested in Massachusetts for planning the “next Columbine”.
They planned to set an explosive in the school and then pick
off students and teachers they didn’t agree with as they fled
from the building. It is horrible, was perhaps unthinkable
before Columbine. There is, however, another place, other
fertile soil they could have learned all of this. The US military
has been bombing “military targets”, most recently a prison
where Taliban fighters were rebelling. When the soldiers fled
from the burning building, Northern Alliance fighters picked
them off… dare I say… Columbine style? When
I work with Summer Theatre Camp kids we have a “no fighting”
rule. More than once during the summer we hear, “My momma
said if he starts with me, I am supposed to fight back.” You
know what we say, right? “Not here you don’t.” We say that
because the example given to us has been Jesus saying, “Turn
the other cheek. Those without sin cast the first stone. You’ve
heard ‘An eye for an eye’, but I will show you a better way!”
Praise God there is a better way! Should
Osama bin Laden or whoever is behind the devastation of September
11th, go unpunished? Not at all. Were the events
of 9.11 an act of war? Of course not. They were horrible acts
– unthinkable – but a criminal act is not an excuse for war.
The second most devastating act of terrorism on US soil was
the Oklahoma City bombing by Timothy McVeigh. Did we wage
war on all white male veterans? An
overwhelming majority of Americans (the media says 90%) approve
of our “War on Terrorism”. It isn’t popular to suggest different
ways of looking at things, or calling US foreign policy into
question. So we continue, the richest country in the world,
bombing the poorest country in the world. Yet people still
ask for alternatives. It would do no good to tell me that
my pole beans aren’t growing correctly. I have observed the
same. Rather, give me some suggestions about how to go about
it differently. I echo the sentiment heard in some circles
that bin Laden should be tried as a criminal in the World
Court. It is, after all, a crime against humanity. Let us
put our faith in justice rather than force. Who
can win a war on Terrorism? We had a war on drugs once, and
my neighborhood is still feeling the devastation and fall
out. Most drug abusers, as you know, are white males. In contrast,
the “War on Drugs” put an unbalanced number of young black
men, 90 some percent of the convictions, into prison. Was
the Taliban the answer for government in Afghanistan? No way!
Their treatment of women and outright violations of the UN
Universal Declaration of Human Rights prove that they are
unfit for rule. Let us not, however, forget that we (yes,
that means our government) put the Taliban in charge of Afghanistan
to deal with the Communists and the drugs. (Who can forget
Billy Joel’s song, “We Didn’t Start the Fire” with the perhaps
prophetic stanza, “Begin, Reagan, Palestine, terror on the
airline. Ayatollah's in Iran, Russians in Afghanistan”?) George
W. Bush was quoted as saying, “Every known terrorist camp
must be shut down!” However, one such camp exists right here
in the United States: the US Army Western Hemisphere Institute
for Security Cooperation (WHISC – Also called the School of
the Americas or SOA). This school trains Latin American soldiers
in terrorist-type tactics. Graduates are responsible for some
of the worst human rights abuses in Latin America. My partner,
Michelle, and I recently went south to Georgia to join a vigil
in front of this school. We marched for three hours in front
of the fence while singers read off names of people known
to be killed by graduates of this school. We solemnly sang,
“Presenté” after each name, standing in solidarity with victims
of US sponsored, tax-dollar supported violence. “What
you sow, you shall also reap” And
so, we respond to violence with violence. How I wish Dr. King
were still here with us. He once uttered these words, “Darkness
cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Violence
cannot drive out violence, only love can do that.” And quoting Gandhi said, “An eye for an eye will leave everyone
blind.” You see, in this day and age, it is even more imperative
that people take up the mantle of love, clothe themselves
in truth, light and be willing to speak truth to power; whether
that power is the US government, the Taliban leadership, the
church, or even Cardinal Bevilacqua. (Bevilacqua, Philly’s
archbishop, vocally supports the war.) Recently,
a bunch of people in our community and neighborhood gathered
for a discussion about the biblical mandates to “submit to
all authority”. (There are tapes of the conversation, so call
us if you want to hear it.) I won’t go into too much detail
except to say this one thing: Those Christian aid relief workers
sure weren’t submitting to the Taliban authority when they
preached to the Afghans. When the church did submit
to authority in history it resulted in the deaths of thousands
of Jews during the Nazi occupation of Europe. We should all
continue to look at these passages and ask for discernment
before they are used as a blanket statement in support of
human destruction. It’s
no secret. Things aren’t new. Though the events of the past
few months changed lives, ripped families apart, unified us
under a banner that has all but blinded us to the truth. What
truth? The truth that “vengeance is mine” is only half the
verse. The rest speaks, “Says the Lord.” The truth that “What
you plant, you shall also reap.” Truth that says, “God bless
America” is incomplete unless accompanied by, “And God bless
Afghanistan.” While we’re at it, “God bless Everyone!” For
God’s reign is not for only one part of this world and, as
our friends in Mosaic Community’s shirts read, “For God so
loved…THE WORLD.” I
believe these seeds of violence have been sown for a long
time, and must be pulled out at the root, whatever dirt and
bugs and ugliness come with it. We may be forced to come face
to face with the violence in our own lives. It could have
a profound effect on how we shop, worship, raise our kids,
and watch TV. Next year I get another chance for pole beans,
nature is graceful in her second chances. Hopefully, I can
coax these beans up a pole, producing a nourishing crop. The
work will not be any easier. Also in this next season, I pray
we can end this cycle of war and violence. I pray for the
rains of Truth, soil of Faith, fertilizer of Justice and the
son of Love to wither the violence and grow in its place a
peace plant whose branches are far reaching and leaves are
wide spread. Thanks be to God. Mike
Brix Why Care About Restorative Justice? I am sitting in a coffee shop in West Philadelphia, worried.
My husband lost his wallet somewhere between last night and
this morning. We moved to Philadelphia a week ago with no
savings and in search of the perfect jobs. The $20 in the
wallet matters and the little bit of possibility left that
about-to-be-cancelled-if-we-can’t-find-it Visa card could
mean the difference between having phone service installed
or living off the cell phone. Did
I mention that I am sitting in a
coffee shop? Yes, that does mean that I just threw
down $1.25 for a cup of coffee. Cell phone, you say? Oh, another
$50 per month to never miss a call. At least this way we can
call the credit card company while we sip our joe. Though
Philly is the fraud capital of the United States, my thoughts
concerning the AWOL wallet are mostly that the money was not
fully ours. Having moved twice in the past four months, we
have certainly fallen behind in our tithing. If that wallet
were snatched, the one who came across ‘our” $20 probably
needed it more than we do. This is not to say that we do not
need to be responsible with our money. However, we do need
to be aware of the needs of those living in sustained poverty
around us. It
reminds me of the opening scenes in Les Miserables. Jean Valjean,
a just released convict, is seeking lodging in a small village.
The villagers turn against him, warning one another that an
ex-con is wandering in the town. As Valjean seeks a warm bed,
he is told to try just one more door, the home of the bishop.
Bishop Bienvenu takes him in, giving him the benefit of the
doubt, a hearty meal and a bed with clean linens. Valjean,
tempted beyond consolation by the abundance of silver, swipes
several plates from the cupboard and flees into the night.
in the morning on hearing that the silver has been swiped,
the bishop merely reflects, “I have for a long time wrongfully
withheld this silver; it belonged to the poor. Who was this
man? A poor man evidently.” And when given the chance to have
him arrested, he goes on to give him the silver candlesticks
as well. Bienvenu
practices the principles of Restorative Justice with the same
attitude that I hope to attain. He recognizes that
justice must be based on intention and the
knowledge that our lives as human beings are interconnected. How
did I arrive at this understanding? I was raised on pacifism,
taught to turn the other cheek. I was required to love my
enemies and to pray for those who persecuted me. This I did
out of spite, with pride. Obviously if I were capable of overcoming
the injustice against me enough to walk a second mile, I was
a better person than the one who harmed me.
Or so I believed. I failed to see that we were interconnected,
and that my bitter pride could further ignite indignation.
Vengeance
goes beyond exacting revenge. There is vengeance in giving
the shirt off your back, if your intent is to humiliate. When
I swam in the pride of giving to the evildoer, I exacted my
own intentional brand of revenge. This
is where I encounter Restorative Justice at a personal level.
It informs my intention. Monseigneur
Bienvenu does not intend to bask in the proud knowledge that
he gave his cloak when only his coat was required. He recognizes
his part in the encounter. The money that bought the
silver belonged to the poor. He had not acted as a
good steward. He had committed an injustice against the poor
and he chose to acknowledge Jean Valjean as their emissary.
Due to this recognition of their interconnectedness, he intends
to restore the balance of justice. If
crime causes harm, justice most restore that harm. To cause
greater harm only furthers the cycle of injustice. This is
the essence of Restorative Justice. If
justice is based on restoration as opposed to retribution,
the cycles of violence, the repetition of history can be altered.
Justice of a restorative nature recognizes that we, all humans,
are interconnected. This is where I encounter Restorative
Justice at a global level. Economic strategies implemented
in the global North have a direct effect on people in the
global South. As individuals we are interconnected, so much
more then nation-states, and international corporate entities.
These organizations do not give with the intent of
never seeing their cloak again. Instead, programs like the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization
(WTO) offer loans to developing countries in need of support.
And then they expect to receive their money back with interest,
regardless of the country’s ability to repay their debt. By
demanding that these nations pay a greater amount to the IMF
than to their budgets for health and education, they humiliate
those with whom they are interconnected. This
is where I encounter Restorative Justice at a domestic level.
My desire to see suffering cease in the global South can only
come through teaching alternatives in the global North. Presently
U.S. corporate and government bodies implement strategies
in developing countries that will ultimately devastate and
humiliate the citizens of their targets. The individuals of
Iraq do not deserve the sanctions now placed on them because
of Saddam Hussein, a leader they have not chosen. These sanctions
cause the starvation and deprivation of millions of
Iraqis. Having learned in the aftermath of September
Ii that we cannot bear the devastation of 5,000, why do we
insist that others end ore such suffering? Everyday
throughout the world due to global and domestic policies,
35,615 children die of starvation a number too staggering
to broadcast, a number so routine its monotonous broadcast
would cause boredom. We, the consumers of the media, intentionally
overlook our interconnectedness to the humanity out there
by not seeking to hear the news from out there. As
we seek justice in these coming
months and years, we must keep the principles of restorative
justice at hand. While we recognize that a horrible crime
has been committed, and recompense is due, we must acknowledge
that our nation has committed horrible crimes throughout the
world, and begin to reconcile our offenses. If we say that
the actions of these terrorists were unmerited, then we must
also admit that our counteractions are unwarranted as they
destroy the lives and lands of innocent men and women. We
must teach that justice is the restoration of
harm, or we will perpetuate the unending cycle of injustice.
Megan Scott Abu-Jamal
and Faulkner: Race and Peace in Philadelphia Forty-eight years ago the U.S. Supreme Court decided Brown
vs. Board of Education, and thirty-eight years ago Congress
passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, yet we still live in
one of the most segregated Cities in the United States.
Nothing symbolizes the chasm that exists between racial
groups more than the mere mentioning of the name Mumia Abu-Jamal.
Ask most white people and their response will likely
be that Mumia received a fair trial and should be punished.
Most people of color on the other hand feel that Mumia
was railroaded through a racist criminal justice system, and
that he epitomizes what happens to hundreds of thousands of
young men of color every year.
In the midst of this you have people who do not know
what to think. Admittedly,
the criminal justice system is racist. Let’s face it, we live
in a society whose history wove racism into the fabric of
our lives from the very beginning. Our Constitution was founded on the principles of the Declaration
of Independence which boldly proclaimed that “All Men are
Created Equal” — that is unless you were a black slave. If
you were a slave, then you only counted as three-fifths of
a person, and you certainly weren’t free. Well, the 13th,
14th and 15th Amendments (outlawing slavery, guaranteeing
the equal protection of laws, and giving African-Americans
the right to vote) were intended to remedy the mistakes of
our past. However, systems of racism still live on. Racism
permeates our society and can be seen in small glimpses every
day. One of those glimpses, perhaps not a small one, is the
case of Mumia Abu-Jamal.
In this article I want to present to you an overview
of what happened on December 9, 1981, what happened in the
trial and in Mumia’s subsequent appeals.
What I am writing is my best effort to wrestle the
truth from the rhetoric of both the “Mumia Camp” and the “Faulkner
Camp.” Both sides suffer from a sort of myopia — one that
allows them both to proclaim that they are seeking justice
while the other is seeking injustice.
It is this myopia that must ultimately be cured if
there is any hope of actual justice.
Here’s what I know: Mumia
Abu-Jamal (formerly Wesley Cook) began his journalism career
in the mid 60’s with the Black Panther Party.
At the age of 15 he was Minister of Information for
the Philadelphia chapter.
After the Panthers fell apart in the early-70s Mumia
turned to broadcasting, and by age 25, he was one of the top
names in local radio, interviewing such luminaries as Jesse
Jackson and the Pointer Sisters and winning a Peabody Award
for his coverage of the Pope's visit. In March of 1981, Abu-Jamal
was fired from his part-time job as a reporter for Philadelphia's
NPR (National Public Radio) affiliate station, WUHY-FM, (now
WHYY) in Philadelphia.
(There is a whole story behind Mumia’s firing too.
It is connected to his relationship with the MOVE group, and
its leader John Africa, but that’s another article).
After his termination from radio Abu-Jamal got a job
as a cab driver. This is why he was on the corner of 13th
and Locust Streets on December 9, 1981. At
3:55 AM on December 9, 1981 Daniel Faulkner, a twenty-five
year old police officer observed a light blue Volkswagen driving
down 13th Street (a one way street) the wrong way
and then turning east onto Locust Street. Officer Faulkner
pulled the Volkswagen over and, according to police radios
tapes, prior to leaving his car, Faulkner radioed for a police
wagon to back him up. Officer Faulkner exited his vehicle
and approached the driver's side of the Volkswagen, which
was being driven by Mr. William Cook (Abu-Jamal’s brother).
Officer Faulkner asked Mr. Cook to exit his car. Witnesses
at Abu-Jamal’s trial stated that they saw Mr. Cook punch Officer
Faulkner in the face. The officer responded by striking Cook,
apparently with his flashlight, and then turned Cook towards
the car. Coincidentally,
sitting in a taxicab across the street and watching the events
as they unfolded, was Mumia Abu Jamal. According to witnesses,
Abu-Jamal exited his taxi and ran across the street toward
the Officer and his brother, William Cook. While Officer Faulkner
was distracted by Mr. Cook, with his back turned to Abu-Jamal,
Abu-Jamal was seen raising his arm and then firing one shot
that hit Officer Faulkner's back. Officer Faulkner was able
to draw his gun and fire one return shot at his assailant.
This bullet was later extracted from Abu-Jamal's upper abdomen.
Having fired this shot, Officer Faulkner fell to the sidewalk.
Four witnesses then testified at trial that they saw Abu-Jamal
stand over Faulkner and begin to fire at the officer's upper
body, ultimately killing him with a shot to the head. The
aforementioned is what the testimony at trial produced, and
is what led to Abu-Jamal’s conviction and death sentence.
However, there is another version of events as well.
Abu-Jamal and his brother assert that there was a third person
present at he time.
Abu-Jamal agrees that he was there and that he attempted
to intervene on behalf of his brother because he felt that
Faulkner was attacking him. The witnesses who testified at
trial stated that it is possible that someone else had been
there and fled. They were unsure what they saw because it
was nighttime. Recently,
an individual, Arnold Beverly, stated that he was that person
and that he was the one who killed Officer Faulkner on behalf
of the Philadelphia Mob. There
were problems and disagreements at the trial as well.
Without getting into the minutiae of the legal processes
that went awry it is safe to say that the trial was defective
in two aspects. First, the jury selection process was legally
suspect. Ordinarily,
counsel for each side, with each side having a fixed number
of strikes to remove an individual from the jury pool, conducts
the questioning of jurors. However, in this instance, half
way through the process Judge Sabo took over the responsibilities
himself because he believed that Abu-Jamal, particularly his
appearance, was intimidating the potential jurors. While this is within the discretion if the judge, it is only
done in extremely rare cases and usually at the request of
both parties, not on the judge’s own motion. Second,
at the end of the trial, when Judge Sabo was instructing the
jury, his directions were very confusing.
In criminal cases a defendant must be convicted of
the crime charged by a unanimous jury and beyond a reasonable
doubt. However, when it comes to sentencing, each individual
juror can take mitigating and aggravating circumstances into
account. Judge Sabo’s instructions did not present this distinction
clearly. As a result, there is a real possibility that the
jury felt as if it had to come to a unanimous decision with
regard to sentencing. This is important because it directly
affects whether the death penalty is imposed.
Many
would say that there were other problems with the trial as
well; for example: Abu-Jamal’s counsel was ineffective, the
make up of the jury was racially imbalanced, and the Judge
was a former police officer and a member of the Fraternal
Order of Police. Even so, no appeal has been effective. Since
Abu-Jamal’s conviction in 1982, eleven different judges, other
than Judge Sabo, have reviewed his claims of innocence, police
coercion and court wrongdoing.
None of these judges has found any merit to Abu-Jamal's
claims. The United States Supreme Court declined to hear his
case for the second time in 1999. Abu-Jamal
has now been in the Federal Habeas Corpus appeal process for
over two years. It is this proceeding that allowed Federal
Judge Yohn, in December 2001, to overturn Abu-Jamal’s sentencing
because of the irregularities that I mentioned above.
Both sides have appealed this decision, with Abu-Jamal
saying that he should get a new trial, and with the government
saying that the sentencing instructions were fair and unambiguous.
We shall see what happens. Again,
this is what I know about the case.
Most of you are aware that there is international support
for Abu-Jamal. He
has become the poster child for the anti-death penalty movement.
I read recently that there is a street in Paris named after
him, and that he is an honorary citizen of France. On any
given week there is bound to be a “Free Mumia” rally at some
place in the city. Lest we think the politics only comes from
the “Mumia Camp,” there have also been countless counter-demonstrations,
and the rhetoric that comes from the District Attorney’s office
is enough to make any political science professor proud. My
job was to inform you of what happened and what is happening.
Undoubtedly many of you have more information than
I do, so let’s share it with one another. Dialoguing about
issues like this one may be charged, but they are necessary
in order to keep the issues of race and peace in front of
us. This city
is divided along many lines and the “Mumia divide” is a representation
of the larger issues of racism, police misconduct, crime and
poverty that haunt us.
I am not sure what the resolution to the “Mumia divide”
is, or even if there is one. But what I do know is that how
we choose to respond to this issue is crucial. Responding
in love is the only hope. What would the response be if Mumia
had apologized to Maureen Faulkner, even if he didn’t do it,
or if Maureen Faulkner would have told Mumia that she forgives
him even if she “knew” he was guilty.
Galatians 6:7 says, “Do not be deceived, God is
not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.”
We as a society and as a city, have sown slavery,
greed, power, and corruption. We therefore reap racism, crime,
poverty, and injustice.
Let’s begin to break this cycle by sowing love, justice,
community, and anti-racism.
Helpful
resources for finding our more about what both sides are saying: www.freemumia.org www.danielfaulkner.com Or go to www.google.com (or your favorite search engine) and
type in Mumia Abu Jamal or Daniel Faulkner. Patrick Cicero The
Way of Peace Last week,
Bob and I spent eight days in the magical state of New Mexico.
In Abiqui we hiked the red mountains that Georgia O’Keefe
painted, drove the 100 mile enchanted circle through the ski
mountains around Taos, and were wrapped in steamy herbal towels
and received massages at a Japanese spa in the hills surrounding
Santa Fe. It
was unquestionably one of my more relaxing weeks. We
also spent three significant days in Albuquerque at the Center
for Action and Contemplation (CAC).
We studied the connection between inner peace and world
peace, the ever-so-necessary centeredness in Christ that we
need in order to be social activists who will make a real
difference in this world.
Both the meditative and motivational writings of Gandhi,
Thomas Merton and Dr. Martin Luther King made sense sandwiched
in the middle of such a peaceful week. But
then on our last day we arrived at the airport to go home.
We found ourselves waiting in long lines to go through
the metal detectors.
Tension was high as just the day before the airport
had adopted an even stricter policy about checking passengers
and their luggage. We
were now subject to being investigated at numerous points
throughout the airport.
In addition, all baggage that we checked had to go
through an even more intensive search process--all in the
name of our War Against Terrorism. Being
pregnant I did not want to go through the metal detector,
so after causing a small scene, an army man in fatigues escorted
me to the manager who proceeded to frisk me.
At the same time, our bags started piling up at the
end of the conveyor belt.
Despite Bob’s best effort to dive and save them as
they began to fall off of the short ramp at the end, they
tumbled on top of each other, and our favored souvenir crumbled. Before
I even processed fully what had happened I pounced. I pounced
on the army man demanding an explanation for the conveyor
belt man’s irresponsibility. I pounced on the manager demanding
restitution. And
in response to my ferociousness, they pounced back, blaming
me for this and that and the other.
I finally stomped away in the middle of the manager
yelling something at me, leaving behind in my tracks even
more tension, anger and violence. Now
I know what you are probably thinking.
The conveyor belt man did not make me violent because
circumstances in our lives never “cause” us to become angry.
It was, and is, a statement about me - my internal
stirrings. I know that. I also know the rules for conflict
resolution and good listening skills and that I should forgive
and all of that stuff.
And yet in that moment of feeling like I was grossly
wronged, none of my knowledge mattered.
My desire to crush others in order to protect myself
runs deep. It
is compulsive, and certainly not coming from rational thought. I
used to think this ability to stand up for myself and not
be taken advantage of was a real strength of mine.
It meant I had a strong sense of justice, which I thought
was at the heart of God.
I believed that my anger and protests against social
injustices were justified; I had been gifted with a strong
sense of what is wrong with this world. Recently, though,
the more I listen to the Taliban, or conservative right-wing
folks, or the USA government, I hear the same God-ordained
sense of justice backing up their perspectives as I do from
those of us on the left. It does not make sense, then, why
there is so much global unrest, violence and war if everyone
is supposedly acting in the name of justice. Here’s
my revelation. I
am starting to hear, really hear for the first time, other
parts of God’s heart: the peace, and the love your enemies
stuff, the words of God that are so radical and counter-intuitive
that most of us do not take them seriously.
We love the justice part. In fact, it makes sense to
most people on all sides of an issue.
And, if you are like me, it often feeds your anger,
cynicism, and analytical mind.
Then we pray that peace will follow once there is justice.
After all, are we not killing Iraqi and Afghan women
and children in the name of justice so that peace will one
day ensue? And
in the airport, I would have gladly loved the army man, manager
and conveyor belt man once justice was done (which in my mind
was them getting me a new souvenir.) However,
I am learning that God has a different perspective on the
way of peace. Psalm
85:10 says, “Mercy and truth have met together; Justice and
peace have kissed each other.”
There is an integral relationship between justice and
peace that I have had backwards.
Let me explain. The Hebrew definition of shalom (peace) is having right relationships
with God, other people and the earth. The Mennonite Central Committee states it this way: The
Biblical vision of justice and of peace is based on the health
and wholeness of the community, so that administering justice
involves restoring community and repairing relationships that
have been broken. Thought of in this way, peace becomes the
method and justice the goal. Our slogan then might be something
like “Justice depends on peace.” So,
peace must come first. But here is the second part of it:
we cannot have world peace without individuals who have inner
peace. My violent contribution to the War Against Terrorism
(in the airport) is a perfect example of that. This means
that I -- a social-justice-seeking liberal democrat -- have
been as much a part of the problem as I have been the solution!
When my protests and fight for justice include violence--even
just in my heart--and lack love for my enemies then I am not
working for world peace. Well,
this is not an easy revelation to be having. Nevertheless,
every once in awhile, I get a glimpse of what I think the
way of peace in the Kingdom of God may look like--action flowing
out of contemplation; nonviolent protests arising from a love
for our enemies; justice and peace kissing.
And it sucks me in.
So, as a person realizing the crucial need for inner
peace, here are some of my most recent longings, which I believe
may somehow be keys to a peaceful world.
I wish that my personal agenda did not always get in
the way; that I was able to fully participate in an Agenda
beyond my own; that my center was outside of myself and my
issues. Can you
imagine the freedom in that?
I want out of the trap of liberal self-righteousness;
to not be on the social-justice bandwagon but instead to radically
love my enemies, especially those with whom I disagree.
I long to be free from the paralysis of my mind in
order to act; to not be so caught up in analyzing and judging
and making sure that I am “right” so that I am able to take
radical risks.
I want
to give up control and finally be able to rest in, to collapse
into, to awaken to God and God’s Agenda which is already taking
place in this world. Perhaps
Proverbs 3:5-8 will become my mantra.
It says to trust in God with all of your heart and
not rely on your own understanding. Then in verse 8 it concludes
that this will be a healing for your flesh and a refreshment
for your soul. Like
the mystics say, only when we allow our minds to sink down
into our hearts can we then give up control and choose to
participate in God’s Agenda.
This brings healing and freedom to ourselves which
in turn brings healing, peace and ultimately justice to the
world. In
conclusion, let me reiterate a few things.
First, if we want social justice, then we must work
for peace. And
second, if we want a peaceful world, we must first have inner
peace. Of course,
it is a both/and. We
need both contemplation and action, both inner peace and the
guts to fight for social justice.
But the way of peace is one that flows out to the world
from within, ensuring that our actions are filled with love
and healing for a violent world. Pam Rowen Herzog From: Jesus
and the Use of Violence
The Biblical Basis Since
the time of Christ many Christians examining the Bible have
concluded that Jesus offers a dramatic alternative to the
violence so common in all human societies. The life and teachings
of Jesus create a new community in which love reigns supreme.
This new community today forms the
bride of Christ, the church. Jesus’
life repeatedly shows expressions of love instead of violence.
When religious leaders demanded the execution of a prostitute
(John 8:8), Jesus agrees—providing the first stone is cast
by one without sin. No one in the angry crowd qualified! Jesus
taught most frequently through stories. The story of the good
Samaritan (Luke 10) dramatically illustrates the point that
those who seek to follow God reach across the divides separating
people. The despised Samaritan ministered healing to one he
might have considered an enemy. Only
rarely did Jesus resort to point-by-point lists in his teaching.
But those few times he did, the words are very clear. He teaches
with these words: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall
be called the children of God” (Matt. 5:9). Jesus further
develops this idea with the words, “But I tell you who hear
me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless
those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone
strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also” (Luke
6:28 & 29). Even
at the most crucial time of his life, Jesus did not resort
to violence. As soldiers approached Jesus to arrest him before
his crucifixion, he refused to fight. Jesus instructs a violence-prone
disciple, “Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw
the sword will die by the sword” (Matt. 26:52).. Many
Christians remain convinced that the way of Jesus refuses
violence. It embraces love and acceptance. It seeks good for
others above the good for oneself. It cannot bring itself
to harm or kill another person, also created in the image
of God. Mennonite and Brethren in Christ Positions Early Christians put these teachings of Jesus into immediate
action. They did not participate in military activity and
other forms of violence. This changed three hundred years
after Christ’s death when the Roman Empire declared Christianity
to be the official religion. For the next 1200 years, many
Christians joined their non-Christian neighbors in armed conflict.
Some of this armed conflict, such as the Crusades, was done
specifically as a religious exercise. During the Protestant Reformation in Europe 500 years ago, some
of the reformers re-discovered the ancient belief that Jesus
brought a message of peace to humankind. These reformers refused
military service. They refused to participate in acts of violence.
This belief, along with several other beliefs, could not be
tolerated by government authorities and leaders of the dominant
churches. The refusal to act violently brought violence on
many individuals. In the sixteen and seventeenth centuries,
many peace-loving Christians were killed for their faith.
This persecution provided one of the major motivations for
some of these peace-loving Christians to move from Europe
to North America. Around the world today these people are
known as the Mennonites, the Brethren in Christ and the Amish. Large
segments of these churches have refused to participate in
military activity over the last five centuries. The belief
that the ancient understanding of the gospel — that it is
a gospel of peace — persisted throughout the wars in North
America. During World War II, for example, thousands of young
men from Mennonite and BIC churches refused induction into
the armed forces of the United States. These men were assigned
to civilian tasks which bettered the lives of others. They
worked in mental hospitals, in soil conservation and in agricultural
research. Nearly
all Mennonite and Brethren in Christ denominations today officially
endorse the traditional peace position of the early church
of the apostles. They, along with the church of the Brethren
and the Quakers, are sometimes called the historic peace churches.
Kenneth
Sensenig
DIALOGUE WHY? This
quarterly journal is a gift to everyone who wishes to be a
part of the ongoing dialogue we share in Christ that forms
us and deepens us as a real church. Whether you just arrived
or have been with us from the beginning, we want you to be
part of the conversation and an informed member of the team.
We hope you will work with us to
build a safe place to experience and share the love
of Jesus Christ. Dialogue is a crucial part of that. If
you would like to respond to any of the articles printed,
that would be great. We have never turned a response away,
yet — but we reserve the right to do so. |
Why Circle of Hope? • What's New • The Cells • Congregations
Circle Venture • Contact Us • The Dialogue • Resources & Connections