The Praxis of Cross Carrying as it Relates to Peace
This past Sunday at Mass, Father Matt preached a homily that began with various examples of contradictions in the New Testament and then proceeded to talk about Jesus' utter consistency on non-violence - "...turn the other cheek..."(Matt 5:39). Father boldly stated that the Church, for the past 1700 years, has dropped the ball on Jesus' ethic of peace. He did not deny that we all want peace - and most especially George W - but that most of us are not willing to carry the cross necessary for peace. I assume he means that most of us are not willing to say "No" to violence as a means of settling disputes on a global scale - or at least require our leaders to.
It's hard telling though because not a word was mentioned on the praxis of carrying the cross of non-violence, i.e., what's it look like? I have a feeling that the rousing applause that ensued as soon as Father finished talking would have been a little less enthusiastic if he'd been a little more specific. My parish likes to think of itself as really radical, and they like to think they've got the inside scoop on what Jesus really meant while the hierarchy all the way up to the Pope are just curmudgeonly old men who love to oppress the laity, forget about the poor, and keep women and same-sex desired (SSD) folks down. You'd think I was joking, but it's almost that simple (despite all this I believe most are good folks anyway).
You might think with all the above being said I wholeheartedly disagree with what Fr. Matt preached. Not exactly. What I disagree with is what I believe to be his pandering to the parishes' sensibilities while letting them off the hook when it comes to specifics. It's one thing to say we're against the war, or violence in all forms, it's quite another to really try and live it.
I'm reminded of the legendary story in which Henry David Thoreau winds up in jail for not paying his taxes as a protest against the Mexican-American War. While in jail Ralph Waldo Emerson says, "Henry, what are you doing in there?" To which Thoreau replied, "Ralph, what are you doing out there?"
See, I feel like if you're really going to carry your cross then you need to really make it hurt. If you don't want to support the war, or our government, then you do all you can to not suck off its teats, and certainly not paying your taxes would be a real sign of your lack of support. Or, how 'bout getting rid of 501(c)3 status so the Church can really separate itself from the Government's support...if we really want to carry our crosses. And, finally, what about just simply learning to live off the land ...off the grid so to speak.
Had Fr. Matt said the above, or that we needed to get going down this road so we can put our money where our mouth is, I would have stood up and applauded - because that's when we're really going to be living consistently for peace (at least in our little corner of the world). Until that time, talking about peace and hatin' on Bush and Cheney ain't going to do a thing but make Volvo-driving-NPR-listing-gourmet-coffee-drinking-baby-boomers get nostalgic for the good ol' days.
5 comments:
Here, here! Obviuosly I wasn't there to listen to Fr. Matt, but I'm sure I can imagine the speech well enough.
Claiming "peace" is easier said than done, and easier yet when you have no real ties to the situation other than CNN.
I wonder at what point these pacifists would change their views if their personal "safety" started to really become threatened. How long would they really be willing to turn the other cheek if their way of life were actually jeapordized in some way, if they had to give up even the smallest of luxuries?
It was only a few years ago when it was cool to want to go after the terrorists who attacked NYC, now it seems more popular to simply blame our own government for those heinous acts...but wait, its normally those same people who believe we should have even more government!?
Thanks, Sarge, but I want to make sure I wasn't perceived as letting us off the hook either. I truly believe we have to take Jesus' words on non-resistance seriously in order to be honest.
Personally, I haven't come to a place in my understanding that I could truly do...say what Ghandi did, or Martin Luther King did. Both I think exemplify Christ's ethic of non-resistance.
On the one hand you have many liberals who like the idea but aren't willing to truly, and radically, sacrifice for what they believe. On the other hand you have many conservatives who justify why they don't take Christ's words seriously by pointing out the contradictions in liberals. Neither side, in my opinion, gets it right.
Hey: I drive a Volvo, listen to NPR and drink gourmet coffee!
Yes, but you're not a baby boomer. You must have all four to count.
Post a Comment