Cardinal Sarah, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, says Mass in the London Oratory for the Sacra Liturgia conference, July 6, 2016. Credit: Lawrence OP via Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).
The
contemporary world, for a variety of reasons, is very much in a tumult, with
questions of race and racism in the forefront of the discussion and
protests. It is in this context that I
propose to offer a few thoughts.
In
the first place, I must note that my Catholic Faith is the root and source of
my view of the world; I seek to conform my intellect and will to the truth and
goodness of Christ, and not the spirit of the age or the fads of society. I
don't want to undermine or contradict the Truth. Ever. Making distinctions and being precise is
critical; especially in moral and theological matters.
In considering any question of race, then, the starting place for me is the call of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, to make disciples of all nations. Racism
is a sin. If you find yourself hating individuals of a particular race because
of their race, or seek to make another ashamed of their own race, you have
drifted from the charge of Christ to love one another and baptize all nations.
As St. Paul says: in Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek. (Gal 3:28)
Every
human person has equal dignity, being made in the image and likeness of God.
Our race is not our identity; neither is our nationality -- that comes from our
Baptism in Jesus Christ.
I appreciate the particular wisdom and truth in the
famous line of the Atlanta, Georgia native, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr:
"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 their character."
Two points immediately present themselves in response to that statement.
In the first place, I think the statement is so moving and memorable because there is a solid grounding in truth that underlies this "dream." We should, indeed, be concerned with the character of a man, rather than on his particular race. All men ought to be equal under law, insofar as reason allows and permits. Law is, after all, "an ordinance of reason for the common good, made by him who has care of the community, and promulgated." It is incumbent on everyone, regardless of their own race, to treat others with charity, respect, and at the very least, in justice. Certainly, public officials have a grave obligation in this regard. In addition, we should by all means extend charity to the poor and the disadvantaged -- of any and every race!
The second thought regards the interpretation of this statement and the larger, and more difficult question, of race relations, especially in the United States. To a great many people, equal rights seems to mean not a matter of equality under law, or in treating folks justly, but of something rather different. Many seem to assume that equality should mean either equal societal status in terms or wealth or power on one hand, or reparation for past wrongs, on the other. History is filled with accounts of injustice, inequality, and tragedy. That of the United States is certainly no exception; and a single ethnic group can by no means claim a monopoly on being the object of such injustice. An agenda of revenge, of coercive redistribution of wealth, of legal preferences -- these hardly contribute positively to society or truly right the wrongs of the past, however.
At the same time, while the law and justice demands that we treat all equally, nature and experience tells us that folks do have cultural and ethnic differences. As well it should be. Equality can not and should not mean that there is no recognition of such differences in people. Different peoples have different customs, music, foods, histories, heroes, and languages. We should not deny to a race or ethnic group its strengths or unique characteristics. At the same time, it makes little sense to ignore the prevailing faults or strengths of a people, especially if you are charged with the common good. Denying someone their legal rights based on race alone is an injustice. Ignoring statistics and failing to remain vigilant of trends within ethnic groups seems naïve.
Also, for reference, here is a link to the full text of the speech: "I Have A Dream," 28 August 1963.
Two points immediately present themselves in response to that statement.
In the first place, I think the statement is so moving and memorable because there is a solid grounding in truth that underlies this "dream." We should, indeed, be concerned with the character of a man, rather than on his particular race. All men ought to be equal under law, insofar as reason allows and permits. Law is, after all, "an ordinance of reason for the common good, made by him who has care of the community, and promulgated." It is incumbent on everyone, regardless of their own race, to treat others with charity, respect, and at the very least, in justice. Certainly, public officials have a grave obligation in this regard. In addition, we should by all means extend charity to the poor and the disadvantaged -- of any and every race!
The second thought regards the interpretation of this statement and the larger, and more difficult question, of race relations, especially in the United States. To a great many people, equal rights seems to mean not a matter of equality under law, or in treating folks justly, but of something rather different. Many seem to assume that equality should mean either equal societal status in terms or wealth or power on one hand, or reparation for past wrongs, on the other. History is filled with accounts of injustice, inequality, and tragedy. That of the United States is certainly no exception; and a single ethnic group can by no means claim a monopoly on being the object of such injustice. An agenda of revenge, of coercive redistribution of wealth, of legal preferences -- these hardly contribute positively to society or truly right the wrongs of the past, however.
At the same time, while the law and justice demands that we treat all equally, nature and experience tells us that folks do have cultural and ethnic differences. As well it should be. Equality can not and should not mean that there is no recognition of such differences in people. Different peoples have different customs, music, foods, histories, heroes, and languages. We should not deny to a race or ethnic group its strengths or unique characteristics. At the same time, it makes little sense to ignore the prevailing faults or strengths of a people, especially if you are charged with the common good. Denying someone their legal rights based on race alone is an injustice. Ignoring statistics and failing to remain vigilant of trends within ethnic groups seems naïve.
Also, for reference, here is a link to the full text of the speech: "I Have A Dream," 28 August 1963.
Finally, in addressing real questions of racism and
injustice, I close with these reflections from C. S. Lewis:
"Beware lest you are making use of
the idea of corporate guilt to distract your attention from those humdrum,
old-fashioned guilts of your own which have nothing to do with 'the system' and
which can be dealt with without waiting for the millennium. For corporate guilt
perhaps cannot be, and certainly is not, felt with the same force as personal
guilt. For most of us, as we now are, this conception is a mere excuse for
evading the real issue.
When we have really learned to know our individual corruption, then indeed we can go on to think of the corporate guilt and can hardly think of it too much. But we must learn to walk before we can run....
From considering how the cruelty of our ancestors looks to us, you may get some inkling how our softness, worldliness, and timidity would have looked to them, and hence how both must look to God.
...pity for the oppressed classes, when separated from the moral law as a whole, leads by a very natural process to the unremitting brutalities of a reign of terror."
-- Problem of Pain, pages 54, 58, & 59
When we have really learned to know our individual corruption, then indeed we can go on to think of the corporate guilt and can hardly think of it too much. But we must learn to walk before we can run....
From considering how the cruelty of our ancestors looks to us, you may get some inkling how our softness, worldliness, and timidity would have looked to them, and hence how both must look to God.
...pity for the oppressed classes, when separated from the moral law as a whole, leads by a very natural process to the unremitting brutalities of a reign of terror."
-- Problem of Pain, pages 54, 58, & 59
That is this blogger's two cents, anyway!
Live well!
No comments:
Post a Comment