Bus Stop Rhetoric

I walk every day at lunch. Well, almost every day, unless it's raining, or too cold, or too hot, or ______ (fill in the blank). Still, I manage to walk 3 - 4 times per week for about 20 - 40 minutes. Depending of the weather my route varies to stay in or out of the sun, depending on whether I'm trying to stay warm or cool. On one of my routes there is a typical blue metal and glass bus stop with three walls, a roof, and a bench. At one end is a panel with a large poster advertisment for the Huminist organization.

The top half has a black background with white lettering, titled What Some People Believe, and it includes a quote from the New International Version of the Bible. "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a women to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent (1 Timothy 2)". The bottom half has a white background with black lettering, titled What Humanists Think, and it includes a quote from Robert Ingersoll. "The rights of men and women should be equal and sacred - marriage should be a perfect partnership. (April 13, 1878)"

Dispite the fact that the color and wording of the poster is calculated to sway and mislead, the real problem of course is that this is another case of a verse that has been taken out of context. The verse from 1 Timothy 2:11 turns out to be paraphrased on the poster, and not a direct quote from the NIV version I found online. Their campain which includes other examples is being presented as an argument, presumably against Christianity, without an understanding of the Bible or of it's greater message. As it turns out, I was not able to confirm the quote from Mr. Intersoll either, nevertheless, I would agree with the statement about the rights and sacredness of men and women, and the perfection of marriage.

Keys

My wife and I went out to dinner with relatives one evening, and as we walked out the front door they decided to drive instead of us. While at the restaurant I realized I didn't have my car keys with me, but relaxed when I remembered putting them next to me on the back seat after getting into their car. That was the last time I thought about my keys until the next morning. Unfortunately, after looking in the back seat of their car and not finding them, they insisted that they couldn't possibly be there. Luckily, about a year later they were surpised to discover my keys under the back seat of their car, and I got them back.

Peter was given a set of keys too, and like me he lost them for awhile. Jesus was asking the disciples, "Who do you say that I am", and Peter confidently declared that Jesus was, "The Messiah, the Son of the living God". Jesus responed by saying, "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church". He went on to say, "I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven". After strictly ordering his disciples to tell no one that he was the Messiah, Jesus began to show them that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer greatly. Obviously this was difficult for the desciples to understand, and it wasn't too long before Jesus had to rebuke Peter with the words, "Get behind me Satan! You are an obstacle to me."

Imagine how this must have made Jesus feel. He's accutely aware of the painful end that awaits him in Jerusalem, but it also reminds him of his begining. Shortly after his baptism, He was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. The subtle and not so subtle temptations of Jesus were an attempt to turn Him away from obediance to his Father, and here again in the person of his trusted friend Peter, the devil was trying to keep him from fulfilling his mission. Only Jesus' love for us could have prevailed at this time, protecting him from dissapointment. It took time for Peter, and the other desciples, to understand that the Son of Man would be raised from the dead. It was only in the light of Jesus' resurrection that Peter, and in turn each of us, fully understand the meaning of Jesus' life and mission.

Social Justice - Class 1

Our instructor began this series of classes by asking, “What do you hope to get out of these three sessions”? A few of the responses were, “How to ground social justice work in church teaching”, “Where can I be affective”, “How do I get over the knee jerk reaction of people with picket signs”, and “How to engage the congregation and ignite passion”.

He then suggested that we step back, and understand a bit about social justice. We always use language to articulate social justice, but too often we are using words that have not been adequately explored. Within the Church politic there is a litmus test that divides conservatives and liberals. This is usually because social justice is too often not rooted in Jesus Christ or Church teaching.

Next our instructor asked the question, “What is justice”? This generated more conversation and various suggestions: “It's what we do for the common good”, “Setting conditions that are good for us”, “Right relationship, meaning fair relations with one another”, “Moral righteousness”, “Equality”, “Fairness”, “Protection for others”, “Equal respect”, “Engagement”, and “Equal opportunity and equal dignity”. At this last suggestion he pointed out that equal means “equal opportunity but not necessarily equal outcome”.

There was a diagram on the white board that was never explained. It was a triangle, with the top intersection labeled distributive, the bottom left intersection labeled commutative, and the bottom right intersection labeled contributive. We’ll probably get more on this in a later class.

In community life theory, each person contributes according to their ability and receives according to their needs. Justice under the law, however, is not equal justice; it is affected by each person’s ability to engage the system, who they are and who they know.

It’s important therefore to root justice in Biblical images. Justice in the Old Testament was called Hessed, which is roughly translated to covenantal fidelity. This related to the relationship between God and humans, who were called back to the covenant time and time again by the prophets etc. The task of the Prophets was to proclaim God's word to the community, by calling the people back to God. When Hebrew society was not working, something was wrong and the covenant was affectively broken. The Prophets came on the scene when the life of the community was not intact.

This was the reality that Jesus was born into; remember He was a very good and observant Jew. Hospitality was an important characteristic of the Jewish people, and although Jesus re-interpreted the law he did not ignore the law. He was very clear in his ministry about the importance of table fellowship. Everyone was welcomed at table, including sinners and women, which represented a radical form of equality. We see a new community being born in the final dialog on the cross as He said to his mother, "Woman, behold your son" and to the disciple, "Behold your mother". As a result the community of Jesus adopted this radical form of equality.

Even Paul spoke of this radical equality when he wrote to the Corinthians. Like Paul, we expect Jesus' return, but unlike Paul who expected Jesus immediate return, we expect Jesus to return sometime after we die. Because Paul expected Jesus’ immediate return it distorted his view of social structure. When you expect your world to end soon, bringing eminent salvation, you don't worry about social structure, you worry about the community.

We read in the Acts of the Apostles that as the early church began to grow it experienced inequality. For instance, the Greek widows were not being treated equally; they were living in poverty and not being taken care of. Church teaching began to change to meet these early internal challenges, along with the fact that the early Church was beginning to experience the challenges of a wider society.

The Greeks and Hebrews had very different cultural approaches to faith and practice. In the early Church offerings such as goods and services, were brought to the community and given to the Bishop, who then distributed them to the needy. Working out how to do this helped the early church realize that a vital characteristic of discipleship is caring for the poor.

So then, what is the difference between justice and charity? Charity addresses immediate needs while justice addresses why there is a need. For instance, why are African men over represented in the prison system? Helping one person to overcome adversity is good (charity), helping the system to address the problem is better (justice). To establish justice means we have to ask the bigger questions.

Unfortunately, more often than not we turn to the government to address social concerns. Today we see government as responsible for addressing poverty, unemployment, education, and health care. In this view the role of the Christian community is to provide a voice for social concerns. Our sources for the Church’s teaching on justice and social justice are scripture, tradition, and natural law. We need to be careful however to interpret scripture according to the context of the people. For instance, not only what is being said but also why is it being said.

We discussed the distinction between revealed morality and revealed reality in scripture? Revealed morality is proscriptive, such as the 10 commandments or the teaching on marriage. Revealed reality is descriptive, such as “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a pearl of great value”. Both translate into present day teaching, and they provide images that we can re-apply to present day teaching.

The Church does not teach in a vacuum of course, but uses the context of history and the experience of teaching that has developed over the years. It has developed over time because the situations have changed over time. Tradition is not just about the deposit of faith but is also about customs, which are sometimes referred to as morals.

Natural law is understood to be the conditions under which humans are allowed to flourish. In Genesis we hear, “Let us create human kind in our image and likeness”. The present theological understanding of “in our image and likeness” includes the divine attributes of intellect (the capacity to reason), will (the capacity to decide), and freedom (the capacity to choose). Natural law is sharing in that capacity and those divine attributes.

In natural law there are two ways to interpret reality which are not in conflict with each other. One is the order of nature (sexuality, medical intervention, ecology) and the other is the order of reason (social ethics, the need for schools, the need for employment). With experience we learn as we move forward because we face new challenges that require the application of intellect, will and freedom.

How does the church approach secular society? A long time ago, there was a theory that all power on earth was given by God. The king was given a sacred trust which meant that revolution was wrong (since the ruler was seen according to God's will). However it also imposed responsibility on the ruler, who was supposed to treat his subjects the way God would treat them. Things like revolution caused chaos, so it couldn’t be according to Gods will.

As we moved into the enlightenment period there was a growing sense of democracy as we know it today. It grew out of a view that everyone is competing against everyone else, and the role of government is to quell chaos. Capitalism allowed the acquisition of property as a right and you had the right to acquire as much of it as you want. Added to the idea that revolution was seen as destabilizing to society, majority rule didn't include minorities and we see the beginning of the idea of separation of Church and state.

As the industrial revolution developed people moved into the cities for work which introduced a new form of poverty. With rural poverty people are still connected to the land, but with urban poverty that tie is lost and it is much more hopeless. Finally, the introducion of child labor and a structured form of production resulted in the beginning the Church’s foundational basis for social ministry.

The Popes encyclical in 1871 recognized that labor and capital should work together for the good of both, but because of the disparities between the two, labor should have the right to unionize. It recognized that labor has a right to rest, fair wages, the human soul must be respected within the work place, and that families have the same rights as individuals. Although the encyclical mentioned that private property was essential for stability and recognized that it is an essential element for human dignity, it didn't suggest that it is an absolute right. Today our understanding is we don't own anything and we are entrusted with everything.

Trust In God

Here is another story that is circulating on the internet. Like I've said in the past, I like these kinds of stories because although they are very simple and incredibly predictable, they present a glimpse of real life and a valuable message that we should take seriously. The story goes like this;

The only survivor of a shipwreck was washed up on a small, uninhabited island. He prayed feverishly for God to rescue him, and every day he scanned the horizon for help, but none seemed forthcoming. Exhausted, he eventually managed to build a little hut out of driftwood to protect him from the elements, and to store his few possessions. But then one day, after scavenging for food, he arrived home to find his little hut in flames, with smoke rolling up to the sky. He was stunned with grief and anger thinking the worst had happened; everything was lost. "God how could you do this to me!" he cried. Early the next day, however, he was awakened by the sound of a ship that was approaching the island. It had come to rescue him. "How did you know I was here?"; asked the weary man of his rescuers. "We saw your smoke signal," they replied.

It is easy to get discouraged when things are going bad, but we shouldn't lose heart because God is always at work in our lives. We should remember that God loves us, and He will never cause our pain or punish us with disasters. Even in the midst of pain and suffering, He is with us and will use what's going on in our lives to our benefit. Remember, the next time your little hut is burning to the ground it just may be a smoke signal that summons the grace of God.

Solidarity

Near the end of my last Saturday class, one of the presenters was asked to speak to us for a few minutes about the Spirituality of Social Justice and Solidarity Work. Although she has been a Catholic for 51 years she had just one thing to say about this, and it struck a chord with me that I'd like to share with you instead of posting something about my discussion class.

She said, "I don’t understand this topic. I get called a social justice person quite a bit, so I guess it would make sense to think I know something about spirituality for social justice and solidarity. I am told I have a gift or a calling to do this work, and I guess maybe I do; but when people tell me this I sense they are pretty much telling me that I have something they don’t.

I really don’t understand what they are saying to me. I’ve read parts of Papal Encyclicals and parts of letters written by the USCCB on different justice topics. I’ve read various Bible passages and several books about the preferential option for the poor. I’ve researched some of today’s most pressing justice issues. I’ve worked on many campaigns to stop injustice and I’ve written many letters to public officials.

Still, I don’t understand the topic I am supposed to be talking to you about. You see, I am not a social justice person; I am just a Catholic, a Christian. I am a person who, by the Grace of God, has had fleeting glimpses of something that I cannot verbalize but that I know is true. I have experienced it, and it has changed everything. These glimpses have awakened me and given me eyes to see.

What if right now we all closed our eyes and became awakened, so that when we opened our eyes we would see all that we really are and are called to be? I think at the very depths of our being, we would see God. We’d see God emptying Himself, utterly giving Himself away to us. We’d see that the generosity of the Infinite is itself infinite, and that we are and are called to be no less infinite than the Love of God.

So I really don’t understand the topic I am supposed to be talking about. There is no special spirituality for people who hunger for God’s justice. It is a hunger for God’s infinite love to be made manifest in the world today. It seems to me that it is what we pray for when we pray the Our Father. God’s Love is our very breath. We all breathe in God’s Love for us and we are all meant to breathe out God’s boundless love for the world. Like Mary and Jesus, all we need to do is say “Yes”, and allow his love to flow to us and through us.

The in-justice that so many face today, including domestic and global poverty, forced migration, un-sustainable consumerism, corporate greed, oppression and violence against entire populations because of color, religion, and sexual orientation, and the destruction of our environment, are the screams that we have not experienced. Let us not forget who we really are in God. These screams point to the continuing need for the transformation of our cultures, our economies, our politics, and our-selves.

No matter what your ministry, it must be more than another campaign, another fundraiser, another liturgy, or another catechism class, because God’s work is about transformation. In every ministry, the work has to be about planting the seeds of transformation. We have to create the space where people can be their true selves and be open to the changes that must happen in their hearts, in their lives, and in their governments. We need to be transformed into people who are ready to listen with our hearts, breathing in God's love for us and breathing out God's love for the world."

Social Justice

Today’s class was a bit different than our normal Saturday session; it was very interactive. In fact I would have to say that it was better suited for a younger audience, requiring group participation and role play. If you've missed my take on role-play and how I feel about it, consider yourself lucky. Let's just say I don't enjoy role-play as a learning method.

The other thing about this class was the total lack of handouts or the opportunity to take notes. I mean, without notes how am I supposed to retain anything, or be able to recall it later, or like right now as I try to write this post? Another big difference about this Saturday session was that it was presented to all of the first and second year students combined into one group. This is especially difficult because some of the students speak English only and some of the students speak Spanish only, the lucky ones speak both English and Spanish, and a few speak either English or Spanish and another third language.

After the opening remarks, six students were brought into the center of the room. They were tied into two groups to representing two groups of people, those that originated in Northern Africa and those that originated in Asia. To these two communities "babies" were added until the string would break, which caused the people in these communities to disperse to other areas and to form additional communities. To all of these "babies" were added until the string would break again, and in this way all of us were eventually added to the growing populations that eventually formed the communities around the world. The idea here is that we all are linked by a common ancestry.

Next we were divided into groups of two that didn't share a common language, for instance I was paired with someone who spoke Spanish only. The task was that each of us was tell a children’s story to the other person without the use of a common language. I tried to tell the story of the Three Little Pigs and she told me the story about Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (I think). The idea here of course is that a common language is not the only way to communicate with another person. People from different backgrounds and cultures would have been able to trade and eventually form a common community.

After that we were divided into groups of about 8 people each. Questions were asked, such as, "Were you born someplace more than a thousand miles from here", and if you were you would raise your hand. Those in each group who raised their hands would then hold one end of a short piece of yarn. The next question was asked and more short pieces of yarn were added to those who raised their hands. Eventually of course there were lots and lots of green yarn connecting the 8 people in each of the groups, that looked a lot like a spiders web. The idea here is that, given enough questions and yarn, what we were really doing was weaving a cloth that represented the connections all people have with all other people. It's the tapestry of life.

There were other short interactive learning sessions (role-play opportunities), such as one in which we took on the characters in a story and then acted out the story as it was outlined on our guide sheets. All of the stories each of the groups acted out were in some way representative of actual situations faced by actual people and families, confronted by real life Social Justice issues. The questions we were to consider were things like "how did each of the characters in the story feel about ___________ (some aspect of the situation)".

I was not surprised that in one of my small discussion groups one person did seem to be "out of synch" with the rest of us regarding the issue of documented verses undocumented residents. Nevertheless I don't think that anyone in either the first or second year, English or Spanish classes found anything enlightening about this process, and nothing fundamentally new was presented.

It was interesting to hear presentations from three people who have been personally affected at work or at home by these kinds of issues. It helped those of that speak English only to connect real life people to the need for social justice. At the end of the day there was a forty five minute presentation on the concept of Social Justice Spirituality that I would like to have more information on. It seams to me that it is important to keep Social Justice and Spirituality tied together. They are not separate concepts.

Nevertheless, I believe that almost everyone recognized the goal of today’s session as an attempt to help us understand that social justice isn't about policies and laws. It's all about the people and the connections that we all share as the Children of God. It is not until we understand this that the policies and laws can be addressed.

Moral Theology - Class 4

Our conscience is at the heart and soul of our moral life, and moral norms tend to make us stop and think. Non Christians may come to the same beliefs, but only Christian belief includes the heart and soul. Moral norms are like abbreviated stories and our instinct is to ask, “What is the rest of the story”. Telling the truth is basically telling a story about things you understand. We were asked to rank in order of seriousness a long list of lies. Most of the class believed that lying to your spouse about cheating would be one of the worst, while lying to protect another’s feelings would be one of the least. Nevertheless, it was agreed that all lying is wrong.

The abbreviated stories found in moral norm includes the three parts found in most stories; what, why, and who. The ‘what’ usually relates to the action, as in telling a truth or an untruth. The ‘why’ usually relates to the intent, as in the reason for the truth or untruth. The ‘who’ usually relates to the circumstances, as in when, where, or how the truth or untruth was told. For instance: in the sentence “I do not lie”, the action is the telling of an untruth, the intent is to deceive, and the circumstances are to tell the story that follows.

The reason we have moral norms is that we use them to transmit accumulated moral wisdom. They speak both to character and action, and they inform our consciences. We use them to sharpen our moral perception, mark the outer ethical boundaries of what is acceptable, and to point to a minimum treatment people deserve given their humanity. I Kant’s approach to ethics would not have taken circumstances into account; where as Thomas Aquinas would always consider the circumstances. For instance, is it a crime to steal food when you are hungry? Some would argue that a crime was committed by those who failed to show charity.

During the last world war, a small town in Europe was hiding Jews from what they considered to be unjust arrest and detainment. As they met in passing on a street one of them might say, “I have two old testaments at my house and I don't need two. Would you be willing to take one?” If the other had room he might say. “Yes, please bring it around to my house later today.” Using something described as mental reservation, when asked by officials, “Are you hiding any Jewish people?” The owner of the house could ‘truthfully’ say, “They are not here”, meaning not where I am standing.

Norms, as you might imagine, come in many varieties. Formal norms collapse the story into a short line that focuses chiefly on character. The mini narratives are about our relationship with God; an example would be Love. Synthetic norms collapse the story into a short line that indirectly focuses on character. These mini narratives are about wrong actions; an example would be not to deceive. Material norms collapse the story into a short line that focuses on what is helpful, they are antecedent to action indicating an objective value or disvalue; an example would be to communicate accurately.

We discussed the interaction of natural law, divine law, and human law. Imagine three circles that are in turn contained almost entirely inside a forth circle, called eternal law. Inside the fourth circle portions of the human law and divine law circles overlap in a small area. Where the two overlap we find just laws. It also turns out that the human law and divine law circles each have a small area that falls outside of the natural law circle. Where human law falls outside natural law we find unjust laws, and where divine law falls outside natural law we find belief.

Natural law is not simply black and white, good or bad, right or wrong; it’s more like art than arithmetic. It’s more about asking how to do the right thing than simply following rules. It’s not the law of nature (physics), but the law of right reason, and it’s not discovered in an external authority but in our hearts. Human law is created by a parent or a government as a precept of practical reason. It’s promulgated by the legitimate authority for the common good.

A just law promotes the common good because it is what is good for persons and groups inclusively. Speculative reason is more like arithmetic than art. John is a teacher and teachers are smart, so what can we deduce about john's intelligence? Practical reason is more like art than arithmetic. Mom, can I sleep over at my friend’s house tonight?

There is also something called a moral impossibility. For instance, the Sacrament of Confession is called a noble task even though confession itself can be difficult for some. For Catholics, the Sacrament of Confession is prescribed at last once a year. However, if a woman lives in a rural area and the only Priest around is her son, she might find this to be morally impossible. Saint Thomas Aquinas would not have a problem with this, while I Kant would.

Using the circles above we visualized how eternal law contains the other three laws; natural law which is universal, divine law which is revealed, and human law which is created. Eternal law is God’s plan for creation, divine law is God’s will for us, natural law is universal, and human law is us trying to do God’s will. Where human law and divine law overlap we are in alignment with God’s will. Where human law is not overlapped with divine law we are held to a higher standard, and where divine law falls outside of natural law we require belief.

There are three levels of norms. Universal precepts are easy to remember, because they are always binding, always true, and always abstract. Middle axioms are typically correct but quite often the circumstances vary. Concrete norms apply to each and every decision because they apply to all situations, are changeable, and are often fallible. There are also two models for norms.

Physicalism believes that moral norms are grounded in the perceived structure of nature which expresses itself in the various faculties of the human person, each of which exists for a definable purpose. For instance, respiration sustains life, sight helps us make sense of our surroundings, thinking provides us with reason and the ability to seek the truth, speech (and listening) allow us to share the truth (or to communicate, comprehend, and coordinate actions). A physicallist would say, “don't act in a way that contradicts one of these laws”. This model gets messy with different views or understanding, and it doesn’t give us an answer.

Personalism builds on the moral principle of totality which holds that an adequate account of the human person looks at the person in totality. Although the human being is creative, capable of practical reason and thinking about practical action, the relationships that sustain them are the most important and fundamental dimensions of the human person. For instance, we are part of the material world and inter-relational with other persons. We are interdependent social beings, each with a personal history, equal but unique, who are called to know and worship God. A personalist would say, “We should act in a way that fosters relationships. This model sustains, balances, and respects the fact that God brought us into the world, not just to survive but also to flourish.

Thomas Aquinas says that we find natural law within practical reason, but he also pays attention to emotion and imagination. He goes back to the heart when he says, “Don’t look for the natural law by looking around in the world, let the world in and see what it draws out”. We should respond by encountering God in the world, seeing Jesus in our neighbor, and recognizing the humanity of a stranger. In other words it is informative of conscience while not determining our conscience.