Pax Christi Minnesota

An Evening with Frank Cordaro, peace activistYou are invited to join Pax Christi Twin Cities to hear Frank Cordaro from the Phil Berrigan Catholic Worker House in Des Moines on Mon., Feb.1 at 7p.m. at Joe Palen’s warehouse, 1055 No. 5th St., Mpls., 55411.  Use the side door.  FFI Joe 612-338-7409.  For help with directions that evening call 612-991-0550.

Bishop Tom Gumbleton has accepted our invitation to keynote at this year’s state assembly!  It will be held in Crookston, Minnesota on Saturday, September 25th.  More information for registration will be posted in the future.  Hope you are able to join us!

Our monthly prayer/meditation gathering will be Jan 23rd, 9-10:30 AM at St/ Joan of Arc parish center. Lynn Cibuzar will be our facilitator. Below is the reflection piece we will discuss after the meditation time. Please join us as you are able.

Nonviolent Direct Action for Personal & Social Transformation by Tom Cordaro  

What is Direct Action?

For the purpose of our discussion we will define direct action as any public act done for the purpose of influencing public policy and/or articulating or challenging social, religious and political values. Some examples of direct action include passing out leaflets, participating in a public prayer vigil, holding signs on a picket line, collecting signatures on a petition, marching in a demonstration or risking arrest by breaking a civil law.

When thinking about direct action, different emotions may begin to surface. We are all familiar with newspaper stories and television scenes of public demonstrations. What seems to characterize these events is their tendency to cause conflict and tension. This is because those who engage in direct action want to change the way things are, and many of us do not like to be challenged to change - even if we agree with the aims of the group doing direct action.

In his Letter from the Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King, Jr., wrote, “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community… is forced to confront the issue. It seeks to so dramatize the issue so that it can no longer be ignored.” As we contemplate our possible participation in direct action, we need to deal with many issues. One of the most important questions is: “How can we ensure that the conflict we cause by our action is creative and not destructive?”

Effectiveness and Faithfulness

There is a saying within the faith-based peacemaking community that we are called to be faithful, not effective. What this means is that people involved in direct action need to be careful not to measure their success in the world’s terms. A faith-based peacemaker is more concerned with being faithful to the gospel than with being politically successful. In our all-consuming desire to rid the world of injustice there is a great temptation to use unjust or violent methods to try to bring about change. It is easy to forget that our coworkers and even our opponents are humans who are capable of being hurt and resent being manipulated or humiliated. It is also very easy to get trapped into thinking that our media image is more important than our message. We can fall into the trap of the numbers game – thinking that the more people we can get to participate, the better our action.

Being number one is important in our culture. Americans love a winner, whether it be in war, football or peacemaking. But as long as our goal is to “win,” we cannot create the space – physically, emotionally, spiritually or psychologically – for conversion to take place. While it is true that we are called to be faithful, not effective, it is also important to realize that this issue is often used as an excuse for not dealing with the very real concerns about how our actions are perceived by others. We cannot hide behind the cloak of faithfulness in order to escape the very tough issue of effectiveness. In dealing with effectiveness it is important that we have a common understanding of what we mean. The best biblical definition can be found in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians:

“If I speak with human tongues, angelic as well, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong, a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and, with full knowledge, comprehend all mysteries; if I have faith great enough to move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. Love is patient, love is kind. Love is not jealous, it does not put on airs; it is not snobbish. Love is never rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not prone to anger; neither does it brood over injuries.”

As we can see, the issue of effectiveness is intimately connected to the issue of love. When faith-based peacemakers speak of effectiveness, they ask: “How can I best love God, myself and my neighbor?” The goal of biblical effectiveness is conversion.

When we fail to consider the effect that our actions may have on others, we risk the possibility that our actions will be nothing more than moral posturing and personal catharsis – a clanging cymbal. At the same time, we must not let our concern with how we are perceived paralyze us into inaction. Many times it is not what we do but the attitudes that we carry with us that destroy the effectiveness of our actions. We cannot always be sure that the people we direct our nonviolent action to will like or respect us. We can, however, be sure that the way we act will show that we love and respect them.

This is a question of effectiveness. We love and respect others not because we are certain of our own righteousness. We love them because, with the grace of God, it may lead to conversion – for them and for us. At the bedrock of every nonviolent direct action is the belief in the capacity of people – even our opponents – to respond to the love of God at work in us. If we do not believe in our hearts in this capacity for conversion, our nonviolent actions will be a mockery and a sham.

An Examination of Conscience

When considering taking part in a nonviolent direct action, it is wise to start out with prayerful reflection. An examination of conscience is a useful way to sort out our various motivations and cultivate nonviolent attitudes.

1. In taking part in this action am I showing respect and love for those to whom my action is directed? Do I see this action as a contest in which I hope to win or an opportunity for mutual conversion? Do I see a need for change in myself as well as in those to whom this action is directed? Is this action being planned in such a way that people will be invited to rethink their position, or will it harden their hearts?

2. Do I use suffering, rather than love, to prove the righteousness of my cause? As Thomas Merton reminds us, “What matters then is not precisely what the sacrifice costs us, but what it will contribute to the good of others and the church. The norm of sacrifice is not the amount of pain it inflicts, but its power to break down walls of division, to heal wounds, to restore order and unity.”

3. Have I set up a hierarchy of deeds that makes nonviolent direct action the test of gospel faithfulness? Do I hold others and myself to a moral code which measures faithfulness in terms of arrest records and time served? Am I more interested in building an impressive resistance resume than with seeking personal and social transformation?

4. Do I seek to punish or humiliate when I act, or do my attitudes and actions speak of the need for mutual repentance? Am I prepared to hear the truth of those who disagree with me or am I more concerned with being heard?

5. God calls us to take on responsibilities. However, do I fail to act because of responsibilities and duties that are more my creation than God’s call? In his Book of Uncommon Prayer, Dan Berrigan, SJ, writes, “…because ‘law’ is a cover for my lawlessness / not the freedom you offer / and ‘duty’ gets along with my deviousness / and ‘obligation’ is hand in glove with my laxity / and ‘responsibility’ is a cover for childishness. / So I carry about these heavy absurd words, a beast’s burden / because in fact I wish to be burdened, / dread to be free / which is to say, I dread to be your friend and brother/sister.”

There is nothing wrong with being afraid. It is a normal and healthy response to danger. It is what we do with our fears that determines whether or not we act as free people. It is through prayer and honest discernment in community that we can act in freedom. Whatever we do, let it be in God’s name. Remember, joy is the most infallible sign of the presence of God.

Tom Cordaro, a Pax Christi USA Ambassador of Peace, has been an author, speaker and organizer in the peace and justice movement for over 20 years. He has served on the Pax Christi USA national council and on the Pax Christi USA national staff. He is a member of the Pax Christi USA anti-racism team and is a parish pastoral minister in Illinois .

For the complete article, go to http://www.cpt.org/resources/writings/cordaro

 November 30, 2009

Last week three of us attend the hearing for Ken Mendez.  And it sounds like he is going to trial for voting in 2006.  He was on the news last week to let people know about his cause.  Over 50 people or organizations have written letters on his behalf but the county attorney is not paying any attention thus far.  One of them is attached to this email. All of our Pax Christi group signed it.  We hope to be back at the courthouse en masse Monday afternoon when his trial is again addressed.  Hopefully it will then be dismissed — this is our aim, God willing.

May 6, 2009 To Whom It May Concern, We, the members of Pax Christi Northwest Minnesota, are writing on behalf of Ken Mendez whose situation came to the attention of our local group recently.   This last November Ken, who is on probation after having spent time incarcerated in the Northwest Regional Corrections Center, arrived at the courthouse in Crookston to receive an absentee ballot in order to vote, since he could not be in town on election day.  The officials at the courthouse refused to let him have a ballot because of his previous incarceration.  He said that he had always voted previously and had never had a problem.  After some discussion, Ken was denied the opportunity to vote.   Although he was denied this opportunity (although technically he was on probation and not on parole) it may be understood as a simple misunderstanding on the part of one or both of the parties involved.  What followed, however, remains incomprehensible. Evidently, his attempt to vote initiated an investigation into his past voting record and it was discovered that he had voted regularly, even while incarcerated at the Correction Center.  Statute M.S. 201.014 states, “Any individual who votes who knowingly is not eligible to vote is guilty of a felony.”  Because of this he is now being charged for committing a felony when he voted in November of 2006.   Ken has served his sentence and has made admirable progress in evolving into a responsible, law-abiding, taxpaying citizen.  Those who know him affirm that he is turning his life around and that he has shown that he is capable of being a concerned and conscientious parent for his son.   Isn’t rehabilitation the goal of incarceration and probation?  Why does Polk County find it necessary to charge him with a previous offense that he didn’t know that he had committed?  These are some questions that concern our Pax Christi group and that move us to speak out on Ken’s behalf. It seems evident that if Ken is at fault, then so are some of the officials who permitted him to vote in 2006.  Will they be prosecuted or lose their jobs as a result?  Why is Ken being accused of attempting to act like a responsible citizen because it seems rather obvious that he did not know he was breaking the law in 2006.  If he had, he never would have mentioned his previous voting record.  If county officials are excused for their failure to deny Ken the right to vote in 2006 (and they are in a position to know voting rules and regulations) why is Ken being held to being more responsible than they?   Ordinarily voting and the desire to vote are considered commendable indicators of good citizenship and as signs of taking on full responsibility as a citizen.  Why is Ken being singled out two years after the alleged felony for prosecution?  Is it in order to learn more about where procedural flaws exist in the voting process so that improvements can be made?  If so, then it seems that any charges against the officials and Ken easily could be waived, because such a crime has no victims, such prosecutions serve no purpose and actions on the part of all concerned may be attributed to honest mistakes that were made unknowingly by citizens of good will. In 2006, according to what we learned, Ken received the ballot in the mail while residing at the Correction Center.  No one along the way indicated that he couldn’t vote because they didn’t seem to be aware of this fact.  And aren’t registrations to vote checked along the way for their validity and intercepted accordingly?  It seems logical that Ken thought he was entitled to vote if he received a ballot in the mail.  Then why is this charge being carried forward?  It is our hope that a judge will rationally and sensibly dismiss the charge and allow Ken’s rehabilitation to proceed in a positive manner for the good of all concerned.  Thank you for your consideration.  We look forward to following the outcome of this case. 

Please also note our Winter Gathering will be a film festival this year: 
Pax Christi Twin Cities is showing two short inspirational films about peacemakers with discussion on Saturday, Jan. 9th , 1-4 PM, at the Basilica of St. Mary, 88 N. 17th St. Mpls. in The Teresa of Calcutta Hall.  There is free parking on the west side of the church under the freeway, and this event is free.  FYI Lynn at 651-645-1611.

Franz Jagerstatter-A Man of Conscience  

An Austrian farmer and father of four, Franz Jäggerstätter had to make a terrible choice: to serve in Hitler’s army or to face execution. A devout Catholic and loving husband and father, Franz struggled with his responsibilities to his family and to state authority, but in the end felt he could not betray God and his faith by serving the Third Reich.

He was executed on August 9, 1943, at the age of 36. In 2007 he was beatified by Pope Benedict XVI.  Simple yet powerful, this documentary explores this modern martyr’s life and death, and its meaning for today. Franz’s letters from prison are read by Martin Sheen.

They Killed Sister Dorothy

On February 12th, 2005, Sister Dorothy Stang, a Catholic nun from Dayton, Ohio, was shot six times and left to die on a muddy road in the Brazilian Amazon. Who was this woman? Why was she killed? And what will be done about it? The answers may hold the fate of the rainforest itself.
They Killed Sister Dorothy is a ground-breaking documentary feature and a true courtroom drama that follows the trial of Dorothy’s killers and examines her life’s work in the rainforest of Brazil