Beyond Corruption and Deception

St. Francis of Assisi: Mediator or Political Activist? Part 8

In this post, the last in the series, I continue to evaluate the risks of activism while suggesting that a mediator role allows us to better realize the charism of St. Francis.

We stand at the metaphorical crossroads: do we choose the path of activist or mediator? The catechism [1889] anticipates our dilemma:

Without the help of grace, men would not know how, ‘to discern the often narrow path between the cowardice which gives in to evil, and the violence which under the illusion of fighting evil only makes it worse.’ This is the path of charity, that is, of the love of God and of neighbor.”

This narrow path requires us to move forward with discernment and wisdom. We are forced to consider how we can best maintain our love for God and neighbor—as an activist or as a mediator?

The potential liabilities of activism, the ways in which we might depart from the narrow path, deserve one last appraisal. For this purpose I turn briefly to climate change legislation, and the political allies one will encounter in that movement.

As previously argued, Franciscans will be judged by the political company they keep. They are expected to provide an ethical and moral presence, in keeping with the charism of the Poverello of Assisi. If the legislation they support results in corruption that harms the citizens of this nation, they will (and perhaps should) be blamed.

Thus, if FAN plays an active role in climate change legislation, they must assure fellow Catholics and fellow citizens they have performed extensive due diligence. They must be prepared to honestly attest that the legislation they promote will not enrich a very few at the expense of many. FAN must know with total certainty that the spoils of corruption are not the motivating factor behind legislation such as Cap and Trade.

Why have trust and honesty become such important and overriding concerns when it comes to climate legislation? Past events, lumped under the “climategate” title sounded an alarm. A number of scientists pushing global warming scenarios were found to have committed fraud. They falsified their research. This raised suspicions.

Franciscans cannot afford to ally themselves with phony research or with political and corporate actors who misrepresent the truth for personal enrichment. If FAN is to be a legitimate voice for the Catholic community they need to spend sufficient time investigating the systems proposed, such as the Chicago Climate Exchange. They must insure such plans actually protect the environment and are not fraudulent designs intended to amass fortunes for well-connected political players while ordinary citizens suffer tremendous economic hardship.

If FAN lacks the resources, the patience, or the will to fully investigate the ethical and moral status of the legislation, then FAN, out of respect for Catholics in general and out of respect for Francis in particular, must step away from the cause. FAN must not risk supporting morally tainted legislation. On the narrow path of charity it is not possible to ignore or overlook moral challenges for the sake of political expediency. FAN cannot afford to risk supporting corruption and fraud, which destroy legitimate efforts to love one’s neighbor.

This does not mean FAN must step away from the issue. FAN can play the role of a mediator or a conflict specialist, FAN can surface the truth and seek solutions that benefit all stakeholders. In this role, FAN may have to forfeit alliances with special interest groups but that is as it should be: FAN, as a conflict resolution organization, must facilitate collaborative problem solving that fosters the best outcome for the environment and all stakeholders.

The eagerness for “action” carries with it the potential downside that one may err as a result of incomplete or non-existent due diligence. The desire for action can make us gullible and a target of those who know how to speak to compassionate hearts with deception. When our passion for action exceeds our ability to investigate reality, we become susceptible to those who have learned to employ the language of faith to speak to our highest aspirations while covertly seeking power, wealth, and control.

In the climate legislation discussion, distrust exists, in part, due to the recent appearance of Jim Wallis on the political stage, followed by Nancy Pelosi exhorting Catholics to follow her lead. However, many Catholics, upon hearing Pelosi demand support, run in the opposite direction—her presence brings division. FAN, an organization that wishes to move away from division and strife, has no choice but to place distance between themselves and the divisive Speaker.

Jim Wallis presents a more subtle challenge. Doubt and distrust have arisen due to his videotaped comments in which he claims to have been a Marxist. His radical past easily could be dismissed as youthful indiscretion if it were not for the number of White House staffers and advisers who have made similar comments captured on tape. (See earlier post.)

Citizens concerned about extreme ideology informing impending legislation cannot be dismissed as suffering paranoia—there is too much evidence, too many videotapes, for us to brush aside concerns. History has taught us we should be diligent in taking Marxism off the table. Benedict XVI writes in Deus Caritas Est:

Marxism had seen world revolution and its preliminaries as the panacea for the social problem: revolution and the subsequent collectivization of the means of production, so it was claimed, would immediately change things for the better. This illusion has vanished.”

Those who distrust Jim Wallis have not only a right but also a duty to ask about the nature of government the White House spiritual adviser favors. The catechism [1901] explains, “Regimes whose nature is contrary to the natural law, to the public order, and to the fundamental rights of persons cannot achieve the common good of the nations upon which they have been imposed.” It is thus our duty to know with certainty the nature of our government and its leaders.

Catholics have a duty to investigate whenever they suspect corruption, as

Fraud and other subterfuges, by which some people evade the constraints of the law and the prescriptions of societal obligation, must be firmly condemned because they are incompatible with the requirements of justice.” [1916]

FAN members working as activists have an even greater duty: they must be able to warrant, with certainty, that “friends” with whom they work on legislation are well intentioned and of high moral character. They must affirm that they have found no hints of corruption after reasonable investigation. Benedict XVI has reminded us of the challenge we face,

…but if reason is to be exercised properly, it must undergo constant purification, since it can never be completely free of the danger of a certain ethical blindness caused by the dazzling effect of power and special interests.” (Deus Caritas Est)

In contrast, an approach informed by the principles of mediation provides an opportunity for players to move beyond campaign and issue slogans; parties go below the surface to identify true interests and actual intentions; they tap the engine of sacred relationship that drives long-term collaborative solutions.

In this approach, FAN would not ignore conflict or choose sides but rather would facilitate a spiritually informed process in which parties reveal their true nature and true intentions. A process of this nature reveals unstated intentions and addresses fears.

When the mediation process (which actually includes a variety of specific processes) includes spiritual transformation, we find it conforms more closely to the narrow path of charity. The catechism [1888] hints at the task the process must accomplish:

It is necessary, then, to appeal to the spiritual and moral capacities of the human person and to the permanent need for his inner conversion, so as to obtain social changes that will really serve him.”

This rarely happens in the context of activism but is the primary goal of spiritually transformative mediation processes. C.S. Lewis, in the Screwtape Letters, offered a ironic view of the dangers that come from choosing the wrong process:

So inveterate is their appetite for Heaven that our best method, at this stage, of attaching them to earth is to make them believe that earth can be turned into Heaven at some future date by politics or eugenics or ‘science’ or psychology or what not.”^[1]

Thus, we must choose the correct process, we must attempt to meet the standards of the maxim, “Social justice can be obtained only in respecting the transcendent dignity of man.” [1929] The process that inspires the individual to look to Christ for guidance honors the gospel admonition, “Seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well.” Mt. 6:33 [1942]

The choice of process may determine whether or not we are truly able to adhere to the Church’s teaching [1937],

These differences belong to God’s plan, who wills that each receive what he needs from others, and that those endowed with particular ‘talents’ share the benefits with those who need them. These differences encourage and often oblige persons to practice generosity, kindness, and sharing of goods; they foster the mutual enrichment of cultures.”

Rarely does one accomplish this end through political power. Rather it is through filling hearts with a passion for the love of God and love of neighbor that one inspires generosity, kindness, and sharing. These higher qualities do not form in response to government edict but rather take shape through the hard work of spiritual transformation.

Legislation that runs thousands of pages—bills that even members of Congress who vote on the legislation cannot and do not read—will not open men’s hearts, nor will it invite them to participate in society. For this task we need processes that call upon men to embrace higher ideals. We need to bring faith to bear on the process: “Faith enables reason to do its work more effectively and to see its proper object more clearly.” (Benedict XVI, Deus Caritas Est)

St. Francis wrestled with managing the growing Franciscan Order. He faced the usual conflict and turmoil that arises when men attempt to work together toward a common purpose. The Brothers required guidance that they might survive the contentious nature of collective effort. So Francis wrote the Admonitions, guidelines intended to guide the Brother’s group efforts, guidelines often overlooked today, but which inspired much of Taming the Wolf.

Francis begins the admonitions by speaking of the Eucharist and the presence of Christ. For Francis, the Resurrection is not a hopeful event that took place in the distant past but rather an ongoing reality; it is the gospel or “good news” that speaks of the presence of the living Christ who enhances the lives of all who recognize Him.

In the first admonition, St. Francis clarifies the foundation upon which his management principles rest. He quotes Romans 8: 8-9:

Those, however, who are in the flesh, cannot please God. You, however, are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, provided that the Spirit of God dwells in you. If anyone, however, does not have the Spirit of Christ, that one does not belong to him.”

In this admonition, we learn that all Franciscan efforts to manage our collaborative efforts, that all guidelines for maintaining harmonious relationships, transcend the mundane world of the flesh. If we are true to the vision of Francis, we must speak unerringly to the Spirit of God that dwells in men of faith. The only way we can remain faithful to this legacy, in my opinion, is using approaches in which Franciscans facilitate sacred conversations.

Perhaps my limited imagination makes it difficult for me to envision how political activism is consistent with the charism of Francis. Perhaps the liabilities of the political class—corruption, collectivist ideology, lack of transparency, lack of spiritual formation—stick my attention so totally that they obscure my creative vision.

However, the role that FAN and the Church choose cannot be dictated by their desires alone. They do not work in a vacuum. Rather they must consider their actions in the context of alliances they form. And they must consider those who they lobby—politicians. When the spiritual aspect of the effort gets lost and Catholics are reduced to a mere voting block to be manipulated, I cannot see the wisdom of this approach.

The mission, according to Benedict XVI involves more:

[The Church] has to play her part through rational argument and she has to reawaken the spiritual energy without which justice, which always demands sacrifice, cannot prevail and prosper.” (Deus Caritas Est)

At this juncture I suggest we must slow up and evaluate the results of our “action.” Might results be better achieved in other ways?

Perhaps the Franciscan community has overlooked the powerful model Francis presented as a path to reconciliation; perhaps we overlook the fact that Francis facilitated sacred relationships by nurturing and enhancing his fellow man’s relationship with God. In tending to spiritual formation he focused on helping us to see the divine in one another.

Benedict XVI echoes the importance of this task,

If I have no contact whatsoever with God in my life, then I cannot see in the other anything more than the other, and I am incapable of seeing in him the image of God.” (Deus Caritas Est)

References

1. ^ Lewis, C.S. 1942. The Screwtape Letters. Harper Collins. p. 156

St. Francis: Mediator or Political Activist? Series Posts

• Part 1
• Part 2
• Part 3
• Part 4: Civility in Discourse
• Part 5: Facilitating Engagement & Dialogue
• Part 6: Resurrection Politics and Rules for Radicals
• Part 7: Immigration Reform
• Part 8: Beyond Corruption and Deception

Related Posts

• Immigration Reform
• Resolving Unintentional Immigration Insult
• Mosque in Manhattan
• Resurrection Politics and Rules for Radicals
• Saint Francis of Assisi: Mediator or Political Activist? Part 3