The Church and Racism [updated July 8]
We are busy getting ready to move offices in the parish. But in between moving, I will try to add a few things about the Church and racism, as that continues to be in the news. Please check back later for updates.
The first thing to note is that the Catholic Church is not a "Johnny come lately" to this issue. She has always taught that there is one human family, descendants of Adam and Eve, and that the common bond of being brothers and sisters in Christ by divine adoption means that our ethnic differences should not be a source of division. She has also taught that each person has a right to be treated in accord with his or her inherent dignity, being made in the image and likeness of God.
As just one example, the Popes have condemned the institution of slavery since before the Europeans arrived in the New World. Long before there were politically organized abolitionist movements, for instance, the Church had been on the forefront of insisting that mistreatment of human beings based on their race was an egregious wrong.
We also have countless examples of saints who overcame racism by love and self-sacrifice. St. Peter Claver, the "Slave of the Slaves" and St. Katharine Drexel, patroness of African Americans and Indigenous Americans, come to mind. We should know their stories.
Some people have asked me about the Church's role in working toward an end to racism. Since she is not a political organization, she does not propose political solutions. She does work to advance the Gospel message of human dignity through genuine love of neighbor.
One of the tricky things here is that many people use the word "racism" so carelessly or imprecisely it is difficult to know what they mean by it. Sometimes it seems to be a cover for political agendas that are opposite to the teaching of the Church. (For example, if you view the website of the group Black Lives Matter, you will see there statements claiming that the nuclear family is a corrupt institution and promoting transgenderism and homosexual acts).
However, when properly defined as a hatred, contempt or deliberate mistreatment of a person based on his ethnic background then certainly the Church has always condemned that as sinful and an injustice that should be corrected.
But there are a lot of differences. One that is troubling is the way so many are quick now to condemn others as racist. Barring concrete evidence, that would mean they know someone else's heart and mind, which is ordinarily just not possible. The use of the term "systemic racism" or "subconscious racism" is also troubling. The Church has always taught that for an action to be sinful it has to be both objectively wrong and the subject has to know that it is wrong. Although common patterns of sin can become entrenched in a culture, individual persons commit sins, not faceless institutions, because sinning is an act of a person's will.
Another caveat: the old adage, "by their fruits you will know them." When we see destruction of property and even acts of terrible violence committed in the name of "racial justice," we should immediately become suspicious of whether the movement is compatible with Christianity.
The Church has always taught that it is never morally permissible to intend to commit a morally evil act even if it is for a desired outcome that is a known good. We are increasingly hearing many people justify the rioting and terrorism we see in our nation by arguing that racial justice must be achieved "by any means necessary" or that this is just a price we just have to pay. That is completely antithetical to Christian teaching.
Peaceful protests are certainly compatible with Church teaching (although people can argue whether or not they are the most effective means to accomplish a goal). Similarly, no Christian should harass or intimidate protesters even if he disagrees with them strenuously. Not only is it a legal right to do so, but we ordinarily permit people to act according to their consciences.
But even there we have to be careful. I have watched many videos of protests that the media consistently label "peaceful" -- perhaps true in the most literal sense that people aren't burning things or directly physically harming others. But many of them show large groups acting to intimidate (for example, shouting in a hostile manner, verbally threatening, shouting insults and so on). This is not 'peaceful' in the Christian sense. Our example is always Jesus Christ the Prince of Peace, especially His humility at the Passion. If we can't imagine Him hurling insults and namecalling, making sweeping accusations judging others, and so on, then we shouldn't either.
I think it is instructive to contrast the historical videos of peaceful protesters in the U.S. Civil Rights era linked arm in arm marching and singing (such as We Shall Overcome), vs. the current crop of many videos of angry mobs shouting, cursing others, and holding signs condemning just about everyone but themselves. There is a distinctly different tone. My take on this is that the earlier movement was largely based in Christianity while the current one is not.
