Ain't Gonna Study War Anymore

Once a year or so we recall the name and face of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, and we commemorate a holiday for "what he did for America." So, what did he do? His name is on many an inner-city school and community center; teacher supply stores now carry "history" decorations that include Dr. King's face in three-tone color along side the grade-school images of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. We remember him with TV news replays of his "I have a dream" speech and flashes of various Civil Rights marches. But what did he do for us, that we are celebrating?

I leave that question hanging, and propose something further beyond the question: If he were alive today, besides being fairly "old," he probably wouldn't be as revered, because he probably would have been a real bother to our society for many of the same reasons he was a bother before he was assassinated (for which he was assassinated?)

Our schools today are segregated and disparate along segregated lines, under conditions that may even be worse than before Plessy vs. Ferguson (which, of course was BEFORE Brown vs. Board of Education) *See Jonathan Kozol's The Shame of the Nation on this one. We have continued to face significant portions of our society in poverty and/or in jail (today with over 2 million of our population incarcerated). And, we are mired in yet another war--that this time has lasted over 14 years, when you consider that before we invaded Iraq with ground troops, we had been bombing the country daily--yes, daily!--for the ten years prior!

I don't imagine that, given the direction Dr. King was headed in 1968, attempting to point to the root connections between state sponsored violence and social injustice, he'd be a quiet observer today; his non-violence was active pacifism (not "passivism"). He made a point of "comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable." He was a radical peacemaker. And this is certainly not what we celebrate yearly on his "holiday." If we did, we would feel more than a little "convicted" by the challenge of what he stood for.

As with so many other "prophets" (both secular and religious) who we commemorate, we mourn his death but are then able to let ourselves off the hook from his message. In life he was a "disturber of the peace," and then we build him monuments and memorials after he has died.

So now, for example, the radical message of Dr. King has no place in our country's deliberations about war and peace. Anyone who might take his radical nonviolence seriously, in fact, will be summarily portrayed as a modern-day fringe wacko, out of touch with "reality." Certainly, let's not think we can get anywhere constructively by asking, for example, if there are any ways we can extricate ourselves not only from Iraq itself, but from warmaking as a means of peacemaking. Let's not think it is productive or realistic to connect the dots between the 10 Billion dollars a month (or more) spent on the US in Iraq, and our decaying schools, decaying neighborhoods, decaying healthcare system, and more.

In this very early "political season" in fact, we are being wooed by umpteen candidates who want to lead us next after the current administration has left its legacy. All but one candidate out of the whole lot, in either of the major political parties, even dares to question the fundamental principle of warmaking as a way to peacemaking; and that one candidate is so often portrayed as a fringe wacko, out of touch with reality. This point will be lost on a majority of our population. Even those on diametrically opposed sides of the Iraq war issue are disagreeing about timing; they aren't offering any serious leadership to help us address the very roots of war as a way of peacemaking.

I believe Dr. King was serious and committed when he intoned the phrase, "I don't know about you, but I ain't gonna study war, anymore!" Unfortunately we've redacted that one from our historic memory; it would be a dangerous memory if we took it seriously.

Here is another blog that includes texts from Dr. King's speech about the Viet Nam war in 1967, and an audio recording of his speech "Why I am Opposed to the War in Viet Nam."

And an excerpt from a speech by Dr. King: Aug. 28, 1963 as redacted for 21'st Century U.S.A.

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal." I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today. I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today. I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

…And nations will not rise up against nations, neither shall they study war anymore. And I don’t know about you, I ain’t gonna study war no more.
— Martin Luther King Jr.

Glaciers Moving Backwards

It never occured to me in the past when I would refer to change in the Roman Catholic Church as "glacial," that such ecclesial glaciation could actually go in reverse. But it seems that this is where things are headed. In recent weeks, Joseph Ratzinger-- Pope Benedict XVI--has made the latest of Vatican moves in the direction of Pre-Vatican II, and among those who knew him when he was "just" a theologian, this really comes as no surprise.

The return of "the Latin Mass" (actually the liturgy known as the Tridentine mass, and related versions of sacramental rites) has been explained by various spokesmen (sic) from the Vatican as an effort to bring back a small group of "traditionalists" (who, by the way, see themselves as the only ones in the world adhering to the true True Church!) rather than bringing us all (Catholics, Protestants, Jews et al) back to pre-Vatican II.

One strange thing in all of this is that in past instances of dissent in the church, the Vatican has been very clear to say that "we don't make changes based on popular demand. The Church is not a democracy." For thousands of Catholics ("Liberation Theologians" and those who followed them) who for years struggled to address issues of social justice as central to their faith commitment, formal silencing has been more often the Vatican approach. People of faith trying to understand the relationship of faith to nature (a la Matthew Fox et al.) have been dis-invited from the church. Women have basically been told to be silent and subservient. But apparently scismatic "traditionalists" (who, again, see themselves as the only ones in the world adhering to the true True Church) have something going for them that the rest do not.

It also occured to me that there is more than a bit of absurdity in all of this when you consider what is going on in the world. The US is at war, in the longest war in its history (if you consider the 10 years of non-stop bombing of Iraq that preceeded the present phase of military activity), the Middle East is simmering with growing tensions, nuclear weapons are being developed in new and unstable locations in the world, genocide is happening in at least one region of the world, the planet is facing environmental degradation at an unprecedented rate... And the Vatican is issuing road rule ethics for Catholic motorists {{{..and by the way we are bringing back the Latin Mass... and the Cardinal we had previously sent to Boston to crack down on the liberalizing elements of the U.S. Church...who then oversaw one of the most egregious periods of clergy child-molestation is now safely in the walls of the Vatican....}}} And we're going to promote the presence of the Church to the world by... bringing back the Tridentine mass... so we can once again pray for the conversion of the Jews and clarify that WE, not the Episcopalians, nor the Lutherans, nor the Baptists.... WE are the One True Church.

Can you see that glacier shift in reverse!?

Certainty, Grounding, Unpredictable Reality

In my anthropology classes which I have been teaching for more than 15 years, it doesn't fail to amaze me that despite how progressive and advanced we in the industrialized, capitalized world think we are, we still learn to easily to think that WE are rational and right, and that THEY are irrational and wrong. WE of course are the scientifically grounded, industrial, largely urban societies of the West, and THEY are.... anyone who is not.

One piece of this that intrigues me is the comparison often made between magic and religion as elements, respectively, of THIER cultures, and OUR cultures. Of course, in OUR culture, religion has a tenuous existence, in that most of the time it is compartmentalized and made to fit within the technical, economically driven patterns of mainstream society; some might say it is "domesticated." And I say this not as a typical complainant in some supposed "culture war," but simply as an observer of "social facts," following Durkheim's use of the concept.

The Raft is not the Shore

Consider the title. Put it in context of a conversation between the Buddhist Monk, Thich Nhat Hanh, and Jesuit Peace Sojourner, Daniel Berrigan as they reflect on their respective and mutual traditions.

The Raft is Not the Shore