I look forward to Christmas partly because I
get to hear Handel’s Messiah a lot; it’s one of my favorite pieces of classical
music. In it we hear what is written in the Hebrew
scriptures about the child that will be born; Jesus the Messiah is hailed by
many titles: “wonderful, Counselor” and, in Isaiah ch 9:6: “…his name shall be
called…The Prince of Peace.” And so we hear Christmas described as the season
of peace – we aspire to this, rather than it being a reality…and maybe this
Christmas season it seems further away than ever.
Congregational Study/Action Issues
(CSAIs) are issues selected at our General Assembly by Unitarian Universalist
member congregations for four years of study, reflection and action. The 2006-2010 Study/Action
Issue for the Unitarian Universalist Association asked this question:
"Should
the Unitarian Universalist Association reject the use of any and
all kinds of violence and war to resolve disputes between peoples
and nations and adopt a principle of seeking just peace through nonviolent
means?"
This Study/Action Issue was proposed as an effort to
develop an alternative to both just war theory and pacifism. Unitarian
Universalist ethicist Sharon Welch suggests that "a third way" exists
that includes "joint efforts to prevent war, stop genocide, and repair the
damage caused by armed conflict." She calls this third way peacemaking,
and identifies 3 components:
Peacekeeping — early intervention to stop genocide and
prevent large scale war.
Peacemaking —bringing hostile parties to agreement,
negotiating equitable and sustainable peace agreements that include attention
to the pressing need for post conflict restoration and reconciliation.
Peacebuilding – the creation of long term structures for redressing
injustice and resolving ongoing conflict as well as addressing the root causes
of armed conflict, economic exploitation, and political marginalization. (Rev.
Lt. Seanan Holland, Gail Forsyth-Vail, Rev. Dr. Monica L. Cummings, The
Military Ministry Toolkit for Congregations, UUA, 2014)
Just war means that waging war is justified in some
instances, and in the Greco-Roman world Aristotle outlined acceptable
categories of warfare. Early Christianity developed its own version of this
theory, and we see in the time of the Crusades the divinely justified war with
Christ as a warrior-hero. Pacifism is a political or religious stance rejecting
all forms of violence against people, and we can also trace this back to early
Christianity to theologians such as Origen.
At times during the history of this country, Unitarian
and Universalist sentiment has supported just war, and also at times, has
advocated for peace. Modern pacifism in this country dates back to the
abolitionist movement, in which of course many Unitarians and Universalists
played key roles.
Most Unitarians opposed the War of 1812. The Re. Edmund Hamilton Sears wrote the
Christmas carol “It Came Upon a Midnight Clear” as a peace hymn in response to
the Mexican American War. But Unitarians overwhelmingly supported the Union
cause during the Civil War, in which 30 ministers served as chaplains. The poet Julia Ward Howe wrote the
Battle Hymn of the Republic as an anthem for the Union Army.
A decade later, however,
appalled by the slaughter of the Franco-Prussian War, she issued a proclamation
calling to establish Mother’s Day in the name of peace: “Say firmly: Our
husbands shall not come to us reeking with carnage, for caresses and applause.
Our sons shall not be taken from us to unlearn all that we have been able to
teach them of charity, mercy, and patience.” (MMT)
Many Unitarians supported World War I as making
the world safe for democracy, and also World War II; as we know the UU Service
Committee saved many people from Nazi persecution, and Unitarians collected war
relief funds. The Church of the Larger Fellowship began
during World War II, as a way for Unitarian Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and
Marines to stay connected to their faith while they were serving overseas. (David Pyle, http://uumm.blogspot.com/2007/01/what-does-it-mean-to-be-uu-who-serves.html)
The country split over
the Vietnam War and so did UU congregations. Many clergy, as well as many people
in the pews, strongly opposed the war on moral grounds and took public stances
against the war. Some questioned the morality of war itself and moved toward or
into a pacifist position. Others in the pews did not agree, believing that the
Vietnam War was a justified use of United States military; many of them simply
left Unitarian Universalism. (MMT)
Within the recent past,
three Unitarian Universalists have served as U.S. secretary of defense—Elliott
Richardson in the Nixon administration, and William J. Perry and William S.
Cohen in the Clinton years. (MMT)
And most recently, attitudes to the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan have been more nuanced. Religious leaders and people in the pews
expressed support, opposition, or ambivalence about them, while expressing
agreement on all sides that we must support those who are serving in the
military and fighting in the wars. (MMT)
What is more, our understanding of the intersection of
culture and experience, class and privilege, gender, race and ethnicity has problematized
wholesale condemnation of those who fight our wars. During the Civil War, men
with money could pay a substitute to fight for them. During the Vietnam War, those with connections could avoid combat by
securing positions in the National Guard, or, like Dick Cheney, avoid service
altogether with college and graduate school deferments. (MMT)
In 1973 the military became
an all-volunteer force, and that began a change in the kinds of people who
joined and why they joined. Why do people choose to enlist? Besides family
history with the military, and one’s personal opinions about it, other factors
might be race and ethnicity, age, gender, and class. Just this week all combat
jobs have been opened to women, so will that mean that more females will enlist?
The GI Bill made military service worth it for those who wanted to go into
higher education and get a degree. And many people join because they can get
out of the disadvantaged environments they come from, they can improve their
lives.
The demographics from 2011
show us that almost one third of active duty members identity
themselves as a minority; the majority (over 80%) of officers have a
Batchelor’s degree or higher. Just over 5% of enlisted members have a
Batchelors degree. Nearly one-half of Active Duty enlisted personnel are 25
years old or younger. Georgia has
one of the highest active duty populations, and of course we know that Ft
Gordon is growing in numbers. (MMT) And that brings me to ask:
If we were to have a discussion about military service
and our congregation, how would it go? How does our congregation approach and
welcome military personnel and veterans?
Although I believe that our
congregation is one that does welcome our military, the lived experience of UU
families in some of our congregations suggests that we are falling short of
being welcoming places for all. In particular, families have reported treatment
that seems to be unfairly based on stereotypes of people in the military and
their families.
There are also other issues
for the military families that we don’t think about. Most active duty personnel
return home without serious injury, but at least 15% of those who have spent
time in war zones have post traumatic stress disorder (MMT). Most of us are
never confronted with having to shoot or be shot at, kill or be killed.
Such an experience is bound
to have repercussions in one's spiritual life, understanding of oneself, and
the limits of what one can endure. Ironically, in fact, that makes UUs who have
served in a war zone much more likely to have given much more thought and
reflection on deep issues of faith than some of our members who have never come
face to face with imminent death or serious injury.
An active duty member who attended a UU
Leadership School a couple of years ago casually mentioned during a
conversation with one member that he was a Marine. She then introduced him as a
Marine the whole day until he felt he had to tell everyone later that night. He
asked people not to think of him as a Marine during the week, but only as Greg.
Later during social time, a gay man told him that it was fascinating that as a
military person, Greg had to "come out," and deal with other people's
responses, whereas the gay man was fully accepted without question. (Welcoming Veterans and Military Families in
Our Congregations and Communities, http://www.uua.org/international/action/conflict/iraq/32678.shtml)
Despite the Principles we affirm that we respect the inherent worth and
dignity of every person, and that we promote freedom of conscience, “Members of
the military have sometimes felt they must hide a crucial piece of their
identity and life experience for fear that it will not be well received or accepted
by Unitarian Universalists. “ (MMT) Maybe we should be
seeking to learn from the experience of these military veteran UUs in our
congregations, while at the same time realizing that many of these veterans
still carry spiritual and physical wounds from their time in military service.
To me the challenge is to learn to better minister to these veterans as part of
our mission to build the Beloved Community. (Pyle, http://uumm.blogspot.com/2007/01/what-does-it-mean-to-be-uu-who-serves.html)
Going back to Sharon Welch’s Third Way, can we view
military action through a ‘peacemaking lens’? Let me offer two quotes from the
UUA Statement of Conscience document that came out of that CSAI issue “Creating
Peace”.
The first quote is this:
For Unitarian
Universalists, the exercise of individual conscience is holy work.
Conscientious discernment leads us to engage in the creation of peace in
different ways. We affirm a range of individual choices, including
military service and conscientious objection (whether
to all wars or particular wars), as fully compatible with Unitarian
Universalism. For those among us who make a formal commitment to
military service, we will honor their commitment, welcome them home,
and offer pastoral support. For those among us
who make a formal commitment as conscientious objectors, we will…
honor their commitment, and offer pastoral support. (MMT)
This even-handed respect for individual choice was also important to
those who founded our congregation back in the 1950s; they were mostly people
who worked as nuclear engineers at the Savannah River Plant. They went through
the period of American history when Ban the Bomb demonstrators were opposing the
work of the nuclear industry, with the bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 fresh in
the country’s memory.
Don Hostetler told me that he used to think a lot about his choice of
career as a nuclear engineer. He remembers a time back
in 1982, at a UU meeting in Charlotte, when he was enjoying the home
hospitality of local church members. When they found that he worked at the Bomb Plant someone asked, How do
you justify that?
It made him think so much, that later in the year he gave
a sermon entitled: “How Do You Justify That?”
By a strange coincidence, present in the congregation were some Buddhist
peace marchers who were joining groups picketing outside
the fence at the Savannah River Plant.
So during the week he said, he was inside the fence.
On Sunday, he was with many who were gathering outside the fence.
Don says, “I learned something interesting. Those inside the fence
loved their children and believed what they are doing is in their children’s
best interest. Those
outside the fence loved their children and believed what they are doing is in
their children’s best interest.”
And the second quote from
the Statement of Conscience:
Our faith calls us
to create peace, yet we confess that we have not done all we could to
prevent the spread of armed conflict throughout
the world. At times we have lacked the courage to speak and act
against violence and injustice; at times we have lacked the
creativity to speak and act in constructive ways; at times we have
condemned the violence of others without acknowledging
our own complicity in violence… This Statement of Conscience
challenges individual Unitarian Universalists, as well as our
congregations and Association, to engage with more depth, persistence,
and creativity in the complex task of creating peace. (MMT)
I draw your attention to the sentence: “…at times we have condemned the violence of
others without acknowledging our own complicity in violence”. It’s been pointed
out to me that (interview with a minister, name withheld)
“ If
anyone in America goes to globalrichlist.com and
enters their household
income, they'll realize they're among the global 1%. No escaping
it. That inequity we enjoy, which
affords us historically unprecedented
safety, comfort, and wealth, is held in place by violence, of many
kinds, at all levels.
If
we're going to live in unjust excess, we need to be honest about how
it's sustained—for example, how African countries are kept poor
and robbed by the IMF. All institutions
are complicit in this violation,
including universities, funded to research how to maintain empire
(whether it's called economics or business studies).
But
as part of sustaining the injustice we enjoy, we ask some people
to more explicitly commit violence in our name--soldiers and cops.
So, whether or not we believe they're "defending our freedom"
or upholding empire, they serve, kill, and die in our name. We
fail to see how our lives are complicit with the violence of empire,
any more than most white people see their white privilege, or
men theirs.”
Those who protest against the military-industrial
complex might be surprised to know that many active service members and
veterans are also against the way it has perpetuated a society where
politicians make bad legislation and skew our domestic spending on
‘pork-barrel’ projects that even the military leaders have not asked for!
Dave Thut, writing
in Quest for Meaning, says,
“There
is not a strong Unitarian Universalist military tradition to be sure. But we do have a strong tradition
of—and faith in—the democratic
process. In this country, we need
people to carry out orders. We must have no illusion about the fact
that those orders are,
in fact, ours. We should not allow ourselves to hide behind a “not
in my name” ethos that assumes that we are individually without culpability
in what the society we live in asks of its military. While the soldier’s
duty is to follow our orders (and they will do so), our job is…to “build
a land where sisters and brothers anointed by God
create peace.” …and one way to do this is to elect leaders who make
war rare.
(“Duty
and Service,” http://www.questformeaning.org/quest-article/duty-service/)
We can aspire to that but we still are dealing with
military members who are deployed to, and who return from, war. It’s worth hearing what UU Military Chaplain Rev.
Cynthia Kane says:
“Returning from… war
are people—especially young people—with a crisis
of faith, hurting and wounded to the core. For many of the service
members, all they thought they believed about God and goodness is
destroyed; they are looking for a way to make sense of their experiences
and their lives.
The question for UU
congregations is this: will we be the communities
that can open our arms to these hurting people? Can we model how to move
beyond assumptions about military members
and their reasons for serving, and reach out to souls searching for
another way of thinking, another way of being in the world?”
Then she answers her
own question: “I believe we can. I believe we have
the sensitivity and open-mindedness – especially to people with
differing views and practices. After all, is this not the essence of
Unitarian Universalism? Freedom, reason, and tolerance…I believe we
have the awareness of our own struggles and our own biases.”
“Most of all,” she
concludes, “I believe we have
the understanding that we who have made the choice
to serve in the military have done so for our own particular reasons.
Though initially my call to Navy chaplaincy did not make sense
to me, it does now. Since conflict and fighting have been a part
of human history since the beginning of time, then for me to do
the work of peace is more than just practicing peace, I must understand
the making of war.”
Whatever we decide about
our personal attitudes toward war and peace, as Unitarian Universalists we can
be guided by our belief in the inherent worth and dignity of every person, and
in the need for compassion in human relations. Marya Mannes writes, “All wars derive from lack of empathy: the incapacity of one
to understand and accept the likeness or difference of another”. Those Unitarian Universalists who disagree on issues of war and
peace should at least agree that our faith supports all of those who serve, who
have served, and their families, otherwise they too are displaying the very
lack of empathy that causes war and all forms of violence.
Paul Rasor, one of
the theologians who put forward supporting arguments for the Third Way, warned
against political correctness, saying “The
ostracism suffered by those who held minority positions during World War I and
the Vietnam War reflects an unfortunate streak of illiberal self-righteousness
that runs deep”.
He hoped that by drawing on the
commonalities between the just war and pacifist traditions and by emphasizing
our Unitarian Universalist theological principles, he might show that it is
possible to formulate a position that can be endorsed by pacifists and just war
advocates alike, but he admitted, “a question that haunts me is whether our
members who serve in the military would feel less welcome if my proposal were
adopted as a denominational stance. I truly hope not.”
COURTNEY E.
MARTIN, reflecting in her
column for On Being this week on the Planned Parenthood shooting in her
hometown of a Colorado Springs,
writes: “What horror we manifest when we cloak ourselves in
abstract morality. What cruelty. My home has taught me many things, but first
and foremost, I think, it’s this: there is grave danger in becoming invested in
a simple moral story about anything or anyone. The next step is dehumanization.
And the step after that is, in fact, a full stop — violence.”
What simple moral stories have we been telling ourselves about other
people, other peoples, in order to justify violence? What work do each of us
need to do to open our hearts, really open our hearts, to our first principle, and
respect the worth and dignity of each person, no matter who they are, what
their job is, what their skin color is, what their faith tradition is?
In this season of
peace we must not allow the continuation of war, and the all-too-common acts of
violence in our cities, numb our passion for peace, or make us cynical about
humankind. Remember Margaret Mead’s famous quote: "Never doubt that a small group of
thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only
thing that ever has."
Unitarian theologian William Ellery Channing declared
that “peace without can come only with
peace within”. And that is what I wish for each and every one of us here
today…to go in peace, believe in peace, create peace.
Rev. Dr. Gaye Ortiz
