TRAYVON MARTIN AND GEORGE ZIMMERMAN

People have asked me my thoughts on the killing of Trayvon Martin and the trial/verdict of George Zimmerman, and here they are.  But this is not a coherent essay:  I have no coherent thoughts at all, only random reflections…

I have no idea what really happened that night when Trayvon Martin was killed, other than that George Zimmerman shot him.  Was it self-defense?  Was Trayvon high on “drank”?  Was it criminally liable over-reaction on the part of George Zimmerman?  I don’t know.

Did George Zimmerman “profile” Trayvon Martin?  Probably; sadly, so do I, all too often.  Do you?  The news media also profiled in their original pictures of a happy, clean-cut and young Trayvon versus a seedy-looking George Zimmerman.  Were they playing the “Here’s the picture; now you know the answer” game?

Could there not have been a conversation, that night, to the effect of “Hey, you—what’re you doing here?”  “Hey, man—I live here.”  “Oh. OK.”  Why did this conversation not happen?

Shooting seems extremely excessive in the context of a fight.  Was Trayvon on top?  How?  Was he unarmed?  Yes, but how badly must a person be beaten before he/she is justified in considering his/her life seriously threatened?  And how badly was George Zimmerman beaten, in fact?

I’m sure there was a procedural answer to this, but I don’t know it:  why only six jurors?  And why were they all women?  People think the jury was stacked in Mr Zimmerman’s favor, but the prosecution had rights to strike jurors—why were they satisfied with this make-up?

Would a lesser charge have been more “provable”?  I’m thinking reckless homicide, for example, rather than 2^nd degree murder.  When someone is dead by mistake, it seems that there should be some form of punishment or retribution or recompense… (unless, of course, you are OJ Simpson:  “If the glove don’t fit…”)

Trayvon has been compared to Emmit Till and Medgar Evers.  The first comparison is a stretch; the second is ridiculous.

Was the cause of justice served by this decision?  Of course—“justice” is whatever the justice system hands down.  That doesn’t mean the cause of right was served. 

I love the comment of the Episcopal Bishop of Central Florida:  “I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman would have offered Trayvon Martin a ride to get out of the rain that night” (paraphrased). 

Once again, the bottom line:  I don’t know what really happened that night.  But I am terribly sorry that it did happen.  A boy is dead; his family is devastated; a man’s life is in shambles, and he is unsafe now, wherever he is.  No one wins, in spite of the verdict. 

Are we still racially focused as a country?  Of course we are (witness our greater obsession with Latinos as undocumented aliens).  We need to get beyond this kind of moral myopia.  Speaking of immigrants, Pope Francis’ comments are germane here:  “Where is your brother?” God asked Cain after the murder of Abel.   “Who was neighbor to the man who fell in with thieves?” Jesus asked the scholar of the Law.  We need to learn that different doesn’t have to involve a “better or worse” judgment; rather, one of complementarity.  What I need, you may well have.  St Paul, millennia ago, warned the Corinthians about this attitude:  the body must have many parts, all different, all complementary, in order to function. 

When he finally dies, I would love it if George Zimmerman had to meet Trayvon Martin and engage in a “truth and reconciliation commission” sort of sit-down as his “purgatory.”  Insofar as Trayvon is innocent and George is guilty, he’ll have to ask forgiveness, and Trayvon will be able to grant it; and if the situation is the opposite, the roles will have to be reversed.  But may they enter the Kingdom together, the two of them better off than most of us are here now.

SANTO SUBITO OR RUSH TO JUDGMENT?

This will not be the most popularly approved blog-post I ever write, but I hope at least that it will not generate hate-mail, even as it will generate posts that strongly disagree.  That’s OK.

Is it too fast for a declaration of the sainthood of Pope John Paul II?  My personal take is that the answer is yes, especially in the context of a Church for which “one day is like a thousand years…” (II Peter 3:8).  After all, it has been only 8 years since that April in 2005 when John Paul passed to the judgment seat of God and the throne of grace (Romans 14:10; Hebrews 4:16).  Blessed (Mother) Teresa of Calcutta has been dead since 1997, after all, and it was 66 years before Ignatius Loyola was “raised to the altars.” 
 
Some will object that John Paul is not worthy of canonization because of his failure to deal effectively and comprehensively with the evil of sexual abuse of minors by clergy.  And no doubt he did not, especially with regard to Marciel Degollado of the Legionnaires of Christ.  I am willing to entertain the possibility that this was less because of lack of moral fiber and more a matter of lack of understanding.  He was, in my mind, similarly myopic with regard to the plight of the sufferings thousands in Central and South America—too convinced that “preferential option for the poor” was Marxism ‘writ large.’  He had little time, for example, for Archbishop Oscar Romero.  And even after his martyrdom (I use the word deliberately) he somehow remained persona non grata at the Vatican.  A Polish pope would be expected to have no time for anything that resembled the philosophy of communism.  I will always wonder, though, when and to what extent the effects of the Parkinson’s really “kicked in” and deprived him of the focus, energy and acumen he’d once had—without which perhaps he could not face the problematic realities of the Church.  Even a cursory reading of his encyclicals shows this:  when he was in his fullest powers his writings were heavily philosophical (think Laborem Exercens); later, the encyclicals were more and more readable (think Centesimus Annus or Ut Unum Sint).

Nevertheless, I am also sympathetic to the point of view that people can be mistaken in their thoughts and behaviors and yet also holy people.  This veers dangerously into the area of personal piety as a “trump card” for public awareness and conduct, but the alternative is equally dangerous:  the thought that all saints must somehow be perfect in all things (and, by implication, on the basis of their own efforts). 
 
Yet there was an incredible charisma about Pope John Paul II—manifested in his world-wide pastoral visits and the beginning of World Youth Day.  I was in Rome for World Youth Day 2000, and I cannot begin to describe to you the emotional and spiritual impact I felt in watching the Holy Father at the evening vigil at Tor Vergata.  Nor will I ever forget watching the video of his climbing to the Western Wall in Jerusalem to place there a prayer asking forgiveness.  And I will remember as long as I live the day he was shot and almost killed.  I will savor with deep gratitude visual of his going to forgive and speak with Mehmet Ali Agca in prison.  He was deeply in love with the Blessed Mother and the Church (perhaps in large part because of the loss of his own family at so young an age?).  The devotion was infectious.

So do I have a “love-hate” relationship with Pope John Paul II?  No.  But I do have a “love-wait” relationship.  Let history play itself out a bit longer, I would have said.  But having said all that, John Paul II will forever also have an emotional place in my heart.  After all, I sang for him!  And I pray the inspiration he will effect in others’ hearts will be the full flower of his motto, Totus Tuus—I am completely yours, Lord:  no matter what the cost.

JOSEPH THE MAN

Men of St Joseph have a new reason to cheer:  today the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments has authorized the addition of St Joseph's name to be inserted into Eucharistic Prayers II, III & IV (by order of Blessed Pope John XXIII his name was already added to Eucharistic Prayer I--the "Roman Canon"--during the time of the Second Vatican Council).

If you like, this completes the portrait of the Holy Family in our Eucharistic worship, and it reminds us that all roles in life that are love-based and faithfully done are blessed.  Mary was specially chosen for a unique role in the history of our salvation in Christ; Joseph, no less so.  Too often relegated to the shadows and backdrop of the life of the Savior (almost like he was simply painted onto the scenery), still his presence was critical for the human formation of the Son of God--also known as "the carpenter," or "the son of the carpenter." 

From St Joseph Jesus no doubt learned two central lessons:  hard work, and good work.  These are lessons we all can take to heart, as men in families, as workers in our own sphere of activity, as people who involve themselves (male or female) in active love in the world.

So:  welcome, St Joseph!  May our praise for your dedication be a source of joy for you in your place in the Kingdom!

CATHOLICS AND BUDDHISTS TOGETHER?

What do Catholics and Buddhists have in common?  More than we might perhaps think.  The conclusions below come from a Vatican-sponsored colloquium (the 4th annual one, in fact) on 6 May 2013.  Buddhists from eight different countries were represented.  The points of contact below are worth thinking about: 

4. For Christians, sin in all its forms - selfishness and violence, greed and the inordinate desire for power and dominion, intolerance, hatred and unjust structure – ruptures the communion between God and us and among ourselves. The restoration of peace necessarily requires liberation from sin and its rejection. Jesus Christ restored the broken divine-human communion. Peace is therefore the state of those who live in harmony with God, with themselves, with others and with the whole of creation.
    
5. As regards Buddhists, Buddha Sakyamuni taught that the root of all evil is ignorance and false views based on greed or hatred and he discovered the Four Noble Truths as a path of liberation from suffering to Nirvana. Accordingly the ethics and mental purity are but two aspects of the same path of practice: the stillness of meditation and working for the liberation of all beings from their suffering sustained by the third aspect of the path: wisdom. In fact, the real Buddhist compassion flows from the awareness of the substantial identity and unity of all beings, a Wisdom that is deeply rooted in the contemplative practice.
   
6. In both the Christian and Buddhist journeys, therefore, inner freedom, purification of the heart, compassion and the gift of self are the essential conditions for the inner peace of the individual as well as for social peace.
   
7. In spite of differences, both Buddhist and Christian ethical teaching on respect for life is a search for common good based on loving kindness and compassion. The participants expressed that dialogue between Buddhists and Christians be strengthened to face new challenges such as threat to human life, poverty, hunger, endemic diseases, violence, war, etc., which belittle the sanctity of human life and poison peace in human society.
   
8. The participants recognized that they have a special responsibility in addressing these issues. The desire for cooperation for the well-being of humanity ought to spring from the depth of spiritual experiences. Only inner peace can transform the human heart and make one see in his/her neighbour another brother and sister. If we really want to build a world of peace, it is vitally important that we join forces to educate people, especially the young, to seek peace, to live in peace and to risk working for peace. 


Is it conceivable that the Sermon on the Mount and the Four Noble Truths could lead people and nations to peace together?  Could Jesus and the Buddha walk hand-in-hand?  Why not?

THE 'MIDDLE CLASS OF HOLINESS'

In a homily he preached this past Sunday at the Patriarchal Basilica of St Paul Outside the Walls, Pope Francis said, in part:

To be sure, the testimony of faith comes in very many forms, just as in a great fresco, there is a variety of colours and shades; yet they are all important, even those which do not stand out. In God’s great plan, every detail is important, even yours, even my humble little witness, even the hidden witness of those who live their faith with simplicity in everyday family relationships, work relationships, friendships. There are the saints of every day, the "hidden" saints, a sort of "middle class of holiness", as a French author said, that "middle class of holiness" to which we can all belong.

The use of “class” in this context begs a series of questions.  First of them, for me, is “Who is the ‘upper class’ of holiness?”  Pope Francis gives a hint, and it isn’t hard to figure this out:  Peter and Paul, Francis of Assisi and Francis Xavier, Ignatius of Antioch and Ignatius Loyola, Teresa of Avila and Therese the Little Flower, and so on.  They are (to be vulgar for a second) the “Bill Gateses and the Warren Buffetts” of the Kingdom of God. 
But holiness is a daily thing, as Pope Francis says above:  it’s not limited to the “great and powerful.”  What might that ‘middle class of holiness’ look like?  I want to offer two answers.

The first is how that level of holiness might appear in the Kingdom itself.  For this, I turn to a scene from C S Lewis’ The Great Divorce.   While being given a tour of hell/purgatory/heaven, Lewis and his guide, George Macdonald (who plays Virgil to Lewis’ Dante) encounter a woman surrounded by a train of angels.  Lewis hesitates, thinking to be the Virgin Mary.  He asks, “Is it?...Is it?”…  “Not at all,” said [Macdonald].  “It’s someone ye’ll never have heard of.  Her name on earth was Sarah Smith and she lived at Golders Green.” 
Heavenly glory is a reflection, then, of the graced living of our lives “here below.”  It has everything to do with the quality of our commitment and faith-walk, and nothing whatever to do with how many people knew about us.  It means, then (offering my second answer), that ‘middle class holiness’ is every bit as important to building the Body of Christ as the ‘upper class,’ the famous ones to whom we look.  And this leads me to Deacon Sam Shippen.

I took part in Sam’s funeral this past Monday in Prattville.  I knew Sam and many of his family for about 30 years.  He was the prayer-captain (“palanca boss”) of the Cursillo weekend I made, and I worked a number of other weekends with him.  Much of his life was given over to prison ministry, a ministry I shared (peripherally) with him for some years.  He was a man of grace, of gentleness, of humility, and of goodness.  I always felt myself a better disciple for being around him.

He is a captain, I am sure, in the “middle class of holiness” that Pope Francis spoke of.  Outside our circle of relationships, no one would know Sam’s name.  But those that did know it will never forget it.  And I am one of them.  If I but could attain to the “middle class of holiness” I would be forever blessed…

 

THE SHAPE OF THE FUTURE?

I offer the picture below from L'Osservatore Romano (via Rocco Palmo and Whispers in the Loggia) as a visual that leads me to a fundamental question:

Is this a view of the papacy that (while still being Primus inter pares) would be a papacy of service and humility?  If there is any kind of "exercise" of primacy that can be fundamentally tied to this image, how many barriers of division between the churches might be able to be swept away?

As Hamlet would put it, "'Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished."

OUR HOPE IN CHRIST

Here is my Easter wish and hope, expressed in contemporary music but powerful as the promise of resurrection and eternal life.  Christ is risen!  He is risen indeed!! 

Please feel free (and encouraged!) to skip the ad at the bottom...




http://youtu.be/NAVrm3wjzq8?t=2h14m17s