Those who have been hurt or broken in life often respond by striking out and hurting or harming the people who are near them.

• Many abusers are victims of abuse.
• Many bullies are victims of bullying.
• These pain patterns get passed on generation after generation.

Elisha is Jeered

… Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. "Get out of here, baldy!" they shouted. "Get out of here, baldy!. He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. And he went on to Mount Carmel and from there returned to Samaria. (2 Kings 2:23-25)

The passage from Scripture above forces us to evaluate everything we know about God, and what we know about God will influence everything we know about being human: sin, Satan, grace, mercy, salvation, heaven, hell, and redemption.

If there is any passage in Scripture that will challenge our consistent understanding of God it is 2 Kings 2.

Here we have the prophet Elisha at the beginning of his ministry.

His mentor, Elijah, has just ascended into heaven in a fiery chariot, but before he ascends, Elijah grants Elisha a double portion of his spirit.

Israel has newly appointed Elisha as Elijah's successor.

On his journey to Bethel, Elisha performs a miracle, then he is suddenly ambushed by a group of boys who hurl humiliating insults at him. Before the boys could humiliate him any further, Elisha cursed them in the name of the Lord. And on that day, two bears killed 42 of the boys.

Then the prophet, without hesitation, continued his journey.

Elisha's choice to express himself violently is not a coincidence.

In 1 Kings:19, Elisha first meets Elijah and becomes enamoured of him.

Elijah went up to [Elisha] and threw his cloak around him. Elisha then left his oxen and ran after Elijah.

"Let me kiss my father and mother goodbye," he said, "and then I will come with you." "Go back," Elijah replied. "What have I done to you?" So Elisha left him and went back. [Elisha] took his yoke of oxen and slaughtered them. He burned the plowing equipment and gave the cooked food to the people, and they ate. Then he set out to follow Elijah and became his servant. (1 Kings 19:20-21)

It is my interpretation that someone had to teach the young man Elisha how to be mercilessly violent.

Further examination shows that Elisha was born into an environment where indoctrination into a tradition of violence was typical.

So the prophet was a product of his social location, a culture where people automatically tolerated men who acted out in a feral manner, especially if the victims were women and children.

The ancient world normally expects such behaviour from men.

Sadly, these men were never exposed to other options in their lives.

It is reasonable to conclude that you cannot expect someone to give you something they have never received nor to act in a manner they have never witnessed.

Elisha felt disrespected and reacted in the way other men in his social location would have reacted.

He was born into patriarchy, which explains his instinct for feeling disrespected.

Unfortunately, patriarchy has not gone anywhere since antiquity.

Patriarchy as a system does not allow men to express the full range of their emotions, and as a result, men have conditioned themselves to bottle up their feelings.

Often men express themselves either through silence, violence, or indulging in vices and these forms of expression are socially acceptable today.

These false walls of insulation are meant to protect us from hearing "you're soft," "man up" and "men don't cry."

This defence mechanism is experienced when we screw the top onto our bottled-up hurt, and life begins shaking us.

Before we know it, when we finally open up, we explode.

Consequently, those around us receive the residue from what was in us the entire time.

I believe the tragic first passage of scripture serves as a prophetic message to us that there are consequences when we do not do the necessary heart work.

Hurt people hurt people. That's how pain patterns get passed on, generation after generation after generation.

Break the chain today.

Meet anger with sympathy, contempt with compassion, cruelty with kindness.

Greet grimaces with smiles.

Forgive and forget about finding fault.

Love is the weapon of the future. (Tweet from Yehuda Berg, August 22, 2013).

At this moment, when our own pride, image, or feelings come under attack, we have a choice: we can retaliate like the world or, we can look up for help. Prepare Love Praise (R) Ministries NFP.

From Jeremiah's message to the house of David to Paul in his letter to the Romans, the scriptures are replete with instructions for nonviolence.

This is what the Lord says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless, or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place. (Jeremiah 22:3)

Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. I

f possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.

Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."

To the contrary, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head."

Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:17-21)

In a real sense, we are lovers and fighters.

As God's beloved, we fight for our integrity, character and purpose in this world.

Some people, who don't walk in the daily reality of God's love, fight for other things.

Some people are fighting to get approval from others.

Some are fighting for positions of influence, power and control.

Others are fighting to overcome the fear that would otherwise paralyse them.

When we enter the reality of being beloved by God, however, we begin to recognize God's weapon of choice - the power of love.

We must begin by loving ourselves as God loves us, and in turn we begin to love others as God loves them.

Jesus referred to this as the second great commandment: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself." (Matthew 22:39).

We cannot love our neighbours without loving ourselves first.

God loves us so much that He made a way for us to be transformed and empowered by His love. No matter the situation the circumstances, we find that God's love empowers us to choose nonviolence.

The ultimate expression of God's love for us is Christ Jesus.

Hurt people hurt people but for the power of love!

• Aaron T. Hill, Sr is Director of Inclusion and Diversity, Marist School, Atlanta, Georgia.
• First published in Today's Marists, 2023 Vol. 7, Issue 3.

The continent is facing a looming food crisis caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

In better times, between 2018 and 2020, Africa imported 44 percent of its wheat from Russia and Ukraine.

"A striking phenomenon is the link between food insecurity, violence and climate change," says Secretary General of Caritas Internationalis, Aloysius John.

"They are interlinked. When people find themselves in extreme conditions and highly vulnerable, survival becomes the motivation for any kind of activities and often ends in violence and conflict."

The situation is worst in the Horn of Africa and the arid Sahel region, John says.

"In the Sahel region, more than 12.7 million people are exposed to a highly vulnerable situation of hunger as well as exile from their rural homesteads," he says.

Caritas - a confederation of Catholic relief and development agencies - is concerned about Africa's reliance on food imports.

"Africa has been the dumping site for the surplus of large-scale industrial production of food," says John.

"It's destroyed food supply chains and local traditional farming - and needs immediate and quick attention."

Of the 160 million people living on the Horn of Africa, 45 percent will be affected by food insecurity, he says.

The formerly "fertile land of the Nile" is worst affected by severe drought and scarce rainfall.

Violence and conflict in the region compound the problem.

One percent of the land is irrigated. It's "totally insufficient" to feed the population.

People are on the move.

They and their livestock have been forced to leave their traditional homelands in search of humanitarian aid or any means to sustain their survival.

"A recent Caritas report calls for "the implementation of just food systems - from production to consumption" as "key for the development of global South nations".

Food injustice has been meted out in different forms, John says.

Traditional agriculture has been destroyed and replaced by vested interests. Market-oriented, large-scale agriculture is suffering today due to climate change and droughts, he says.

In some parts of Africa, cheap industrially-raised imported chicken, milk and meat are endangering locally raised produce.

Restoring justice to the global food systems means stopping using Africa as a dumping site.

Promoting and socialising local communities to water harvesting, natural fertilisers and pest control is also vital.

The Ukraine-Russia war shows how the global South needs to take ownership of its own food chains, John says.

"It is important to develop local agriculture, traditional farming, identify local food habits and mainstream them into development projects.

"A community-oriented and community-based development paradigm which takes integral ecology into account needs to be developed.

"This will help promote local food systems and supply chains leading to food independence," he says.

Source

• Crux Now

"The war in Ukraine is a spiritual, human and ecological catastrophe," said Eli S. McCarthy, a peace activist at Georgetown University's Justice and Peace Studies, in a recent email to me.

The view is shared by Catholic pacifists as well as followers of the just war theory. There is no justification for the invasion, they agree. The fighting should stop, and the Russian troops should go home.

Where Catholic moralists begin to disagree is on what means are appropriate in responding to the invasion.

Pacifists like McCarthy believe that a violent response will make matters worse. He bemoans the fact that "we have failed to adequately train people in nonviolent conflict, resistance and civilian-based defence."

But he does see signs of hope. He wrote:

A variety of creative, courageous, nonviolent ways of resistance are being activated and could be scaled up by Ukrainians and others: blocking convoys and tanks … fraternisation of Russian soldiers to lower morale and stimulate defections, humanitarian assistance and caring for refugees, evacuations, the outpouring of public statements by key political leaders, reducing the flow of money to the aggressor (ex. via banks, media, trade, fossil fuels, etc.), supporting the anti-war protesters in Russia, disrupting the technology systems of the aggressor, interrupting disinformation, coalition building, activating key civil society leaders (ex. religious, athletes, business), ex. 100,000 Russians from a variety of sectors have signed petitions to end the war, Russians close to the military and foreign ministry, in the Russian oil industry and billionaires, have spoken out against the war.

McCarthy quotes Pope Francis, who, on the World Day of Peace in 2017, said:

"Violence is not the cure for our broken world. Countering violence with violence leads at best to forced migrations and enormous suffering, because vast amounts of resources are diverted to military ends and away from the everyday needs of young people, families experiencing hardship, the elderly, the infirm and the great majority of people in our world. At worst, it can lead to the death, physical and spiritual, of many people, if not of all."

But pacifists aren't the only ones questioning an armed response to the Russian invasion. The just war theory has never supported fighting a war, even a defensive war, if there is no chance of winning.

"Given the vastly greater strength of the Russian military, it seems inevitable that Russia will eventually take military control of Ukraine," argued John Sniegocki, director of Peace and Justice Studies at Xavier University in Cincinnati.

"The use of violence may slightly delay the Russian takeover," he added, "but it will not prevent it. It will cost many lives in the process, both the lives of Ukrainians who could have potentially played major roles in subsequent mass nonviolent civil resistance and the lives of Russian soldiers, most of whom are conscripts, who don't want to be there and are themselves victims of this unjust situation."

Ukrainian civilians receive weapons training, in the outskirts of Lviv, western Ukraine, Monday, March 7, 2022. AP Photo/Bernat Armangue

Arming civilians in a fight to the death, just war advocates agreed, can't be justified morally, as many will die without much hope of success.

"I think the alternative of civilian defence/resistance, combined with serious economic sanctions, needs to be considered as a realistic, ethical option," said Ron Pagnucco, a self-proclaimed just war advocate and professor of peace studies at the College of St. Benedict and St. John's University in Minnesota. "Costs can be imposed by nonviolent means, making Russian rule difficult."

Others, however, do not want to close the door absolutely to any act of violence.

"What is so interesting about this conflict and makes the unselfish dedication of the Ukrainian patriots so inspiring," said Lisa Sowle Cahill, an ethicist at Boston College, "is that they are not even debating what is the best course in light of probable numbers of lives lost.

"They are simply saying NO WAY! to the Russians, and in the absence of adequate weapons, using every scrap of ingenuity to foil the invaders' advance.

"They are using nonviolent resistance because they don't have any choice," Cahill said, "but also because they were not looking for bloodshed but just to get rid of the rampaging Russians."

She notes that "President Zelensky keeps proclaiming versions of ‘Our weapon is our truth, and our truth is that this is our land, our children and our country!' They feel they have no choice but to resist. They'll take weapons if they get them, but otherwise, they will face down tanks and throw sand in the road. It is amazingly working — so far."

Likewise David DeCosse, of Santa Clara University's Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, is "moved by the examples of non-violence happening now in Ukraine and persuaded by the wisdom and promise of the just peace framework."

But DeCosse hesitates to say "how far we take the assumption that violence breeds more violence."

He thinks "that is usually the case. But I wonder, too, if there are some situations in which the only way out of the cycle of the violence is violence for the sake of justice."

Gerald Beyer, an associate professor of Christian ethics at Villanova University, agreed that the nonviolent resistance has been remarkable, that economic sanctions are crucial and that military action will "entail horrific loss of life," he said by email.

"But if Russia achieves its aims — and I believe it will without military resistance along with other measures — an entire nation will disappear from the heart of Europe (once again)."

He quotes Russia experts who expect that Russian President Vladimir Putin will likely not stop at Ukraine.

Breyer calls for "more military aid from NATO and the EU (which they are already moving forward) to help the courageous and determined Ukrainians."

Even those preaching nonviolence recognise that the challenges Ukrainians face don't offer many Ukrainians a choice.

"I realise those facing this horrendous situation may feel that violence is their only option, and I would not judge them for that," said Sniegocki.

"However, I do think it important that these broader issues be raised, and that both the power of nonviolent action and the centrality of nonviolence to the teachings of Jesus be reflected upon.

"I think it crucial also," he added, "that each of us seeks to discern what concrete steps we can take to assist the Ukrainian people in this tragic time."

• Thomas Reese SJ is a senior analyst at Religion News Service, former editor-in-chief of the weekly Catholic magazine America. First published in RNS. Republished with permission.

After hearing from hundreds of victim-survivors from all over the country about how the system has failed them when they sought protection and help, our birthday brings conflicting feelings of hope and heartache.

How can it be that in 2022 so many victim-survivors are forced to 'manage' ongoing family violence and abuse even after they take the brave step of escaping or telling?

In 2019, Backbone undertook a survey of 528 women who had experienced family or intimate partner violence.

The vast majority of these women had separated from the abuser, and many (57 per cent) had been separated for over six years but the violence and abuse continued.

This week RNZ ran a story detailing the experiences of Rachel* and her child. Sadly, their horrendous experience is a common one for many women and children in New Zealand.

After Rachel and her child experienced violence and abuse from her partner, the child's father, they did what we are all taught to do; they told the statutory organisations equipped to intervene and asked for help to get safe and recover.

However, the response from those organisations, the courts and their community further victimised Rachel and her child, isolated them from support and resources, placed the blame on them for what happened, accused them of lying about the violence and abuse and ultimately put them in more danger and prevented their recovery.

Thankfully many New Zealanders reading Rachel's story feel outraged.

Most of us sincerely believe that family and sexual violence is not OK.

We would expect that when it happens there should be a swift response that results in safety for the victims and accountability of the person who chooses to use violence and abuse.

What can we do?

So, what next? How can the general public and those in power ensure victim-survivors are able to access the right support at the right time, get safe and recover?

Victim-survivors have shared their requests with Backbone:

Firstly, victim-survivors want the general public, friends, family, whanau, work colleagues, neighbours and people providing services to understand more about sexual and family violence so people can provide effective and safe support whether that be emotional or practical.

Take an opportunity to learn more about the dynamics of family and sexual violence, including coercive control and grooming behaviours, and the impact of violence and abuse on victim-survivors.

Secondly, believe that violence and abuse do not stop when women separate from an abusive partner.

In our 2019 survey we found that when victim-survivors said violence and abuse had stopped, it was due to environmental changes that enabled her to have no contact rather than the abuser choosing to stop their abuse (she moved to another area, had a Protection Order, was in hiding, the abuser was in jail or had died).

However, for 47 per cent of survey participants, the violence and abuse had not stopped regardless of separation, and these women were often forced into contact with the abuser.

They described having no control over the abuser's behaviour, for example breaking into her home, emailing or texting constantly, bad-mouthing her to friends and family, making untrue allegations to Oranga Tamariki about her and using the Family Court as a new tool of abuse.

Thirdly, understand that people who choose to use violence and abuse use the current system to continue their abuse. Our system enables that behaviour.

Therefore, continually telling victim-survivors to just ask for help presumes that help is available and it works; it's often not available and the 'help' that is there can put people in far more danger.

And finally, victim-survivors want to see urgent reform of the current system and in particular the family and criminal courts.

Trying to get help has often left them further traumatised, fearful, unwell, broke, homeless, and disconnected from friends, family, whanau and their community.

Many of the women that Backbone hears from say that when they made the brave decision to leave or to tell someone about their experiences, they expected a giant safety net to extend under them and their children.

In reality though this never happened.

These women have described treatment toward them from the family and criminal courts, police, Oranga Tamariki, WINZ, immigration, 'helping' agencies and some in their communities and said it has felt like more abuse on top of what they already experienced.

Continually fighting for safety takes a very heavy toll financially and in terms of their health affecting their ability to work or cope at school, have a home, take part in social activities and feel connected.

The Family Court is one important part of our system that stands in front of safety for many women and children.

In 2018 and again in 2021 the United Nations CEDAW Committee was so concerned about the Family Court's response to women and children who had experienced family violence, it recommended a Royal Commission of Inquiry be held. Successive New Zealand governments have refused.

Victim-survivors tell Backbone that Family Court orders and proceedings force them into ongoing contact with an abusive ex-partner via unsafe parenting orders, orders preventing her and the children from relocating to another region where they might be safer and have access to better support, employment or housing, or forcing them into proceedings with the abuser lasting years and providing opportunities for ongoing abuse via the legal system.

It's hard to imagine why the Family Court would actively enable ongoing violence and abuse toward victim-survivors and children.

However, the culture of the court, the beliefs and myths that circulate among many professionals that work in it, often paint victim-survivors with harmful stereotypes - that they are lying about the abuse, are mentally unwell and are trying to get revenge on their ex-partner and poison their children against the other parent.

These beliefs frequently result in unsafe practices and decisions in both the criminal and the family court.

Family and sexual violence specialists have long called for a new approach in courts that better protects victim-survivors, including children.

Replacing the current adversarial model with one that is more investigative and specialist could make all the difference.

Rachel's story highlights numerous parts of the response system that currently fail victim-survivors and their children. And like Rachel hundreds of victim-survivors have called for a system response that is victim-survivor centred.

That means that decisions about policy, reform, programmes and services are informed by the needs of victim-survivors. Services and organisations are staffed by specialists who understand family and sexual violence, trauma and child development, they are accessible for people who live with a disability, they are culturally appropriate and are available when and where needed.

Most of all they are safe to use and result in safety and recovery.

• Deborah Mackenzie is a co-founder of The Backbone Collective and has worked in the domestic violence sector for many years.
• First published by RNZ. Republished with permission.
• *Name has been changed to protect the identity of the child involved.

Where to get help:

Need to Talk? Free call or text 1737 any time to speak to a trained counsellor, for any reason.

Women's Refuge: 0800 733 843

It's Not OK 0800 456 450

Shine: 0508 744 633

Victim Support: 0800 842 846

HELP Call 24/7 (Auckland): 09 623 1700, (Wellington): be 04 801 6655 - 0

The National Network of Family Violence Services NZ has information on specialist family violence agencies.

Lifeline: 0800 543 354 or text HELP to 4357

Suicide Crisis Helpline: 0508 828 865 / 0508 TAUTOKO (24/7). This is a service for people who may be thinking about suicide, or those who are concerned about family or friends.

Depression Helpline: 0800 111 757 (24/7) or text 4202

Samaritans: 0800 726 666 (24/7)

Youthline: 0800 376 633 (24/7) or free text 234 (8am-12am), or email talk@youthline.co.nz

What's Up: online chat (3pm-10pm) or 0800 WHATSUP / 0800 9428 787 helpline (12pm-10pm weekdays, 3pm-11pm weekends)

Asian Family Services: 0800 862 342 Monday to Friday 9am to 8pm or text 832 Monday to Friday 9am - 5pm. Languages spoken: Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai, Japanese, Hindi, Gujarati, Marathi and English.

Rural Support Trust Helpline: 0800 787 254

Healthline: 0800 611 116

Rainbow Youth: (09) 376 4155

OUTLine: 0800 688 5463 (6pm-9pm)

If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111.

The fighters included both girls and boys.

Principal Patrick Walsh says John Paul College takes fighting seriously and is now in the process of disciplining the students involved.

"The students have been identified, we've notified the parents and we're working through a disciplinary process with them."

"The college has a dedicated and very responsive pastoral team who are managing the incident well," he says.

"These are isolated incidents but happen in every school from time to time."

However, a parent from the school says in her view Walsh's response is insufficient to prevent the "horrific bullying and fighting" she believes occurs daily on school grounds.

She says she only learned about the fights last week after another parent shared a video of the boys fighting in the toilet.

She doesn't think the John Paul College principal is going far enough in his disciplinary actions.

"I mean, other schools are expelling kids...

"If there's no consequence, then how are [the attackers] going to learn that it's not ok?"

Walsh disagrees.

"There are consequences, some are at the extreme end in terms of stand-downs and suspensions. We do treat the matter very seriously - we take a disciplinary approach to it but also there's a therapeutic and educative approach as well", he told the NZ Herald.

"We need to advise students why fighting is not a good idea and that they need to use other means to resolve conflicts."

Walsh said the conflicts usually began on social media.

"They generally have their genesis in inappropriate comments made on social media by students, which is a matter schools up and down the country grapple with.

"There were no serious injuries and I think it's boys getting a bit testosterone-inflamed over things. Social media has its benefits but it obviously has its downsides as well. People will say things on social media that in the cold light of day they regret saying."

He said he was pleased with how quickly other students reported the fights to school staff.

On Tuesday, CathNews reported an independent review said allegations of racism, bullying and elitism at Rotorua's John Paul College are "false or incorrect".

Earlier this year the college's board of trustees ordered an independent investigation "by its own choice".

Source

• NewsHub
• NZ Herald
• Image: TVNZ

With all due respect to French leaders, I think they could start by reviewing the implications of laïcité.

At this time, they have much to say about "Islamic terrorism". Worse, some of the language they are using is the language of warfare and of terrorism itself.

Obviously, there can be no justification for what was done in Nice. But in wanting to explain the causes of such violence they are looking no further than Islam.

In a recent BBC Hardtalk programme, Stephen Sackur interviewed French professor of sociology and political advisor, Dominique Schnapper, who explained what she called the French form of secularism, which she assured us is superior to what we find in Britain and USA.

Most of us accept the separation of Church and State, including agencies of the State, and rightly. But laïcité goes further by including "the public sphere" with the State. Consequently, religion is mainly for the private sphere.

According to the Professor, curtailing the scope of religion in the public sphere gives people freedom!!

I suggest, on the contrary, that the State and the public forum are not the same; the public forum belongs to the people, to society.

It is where minds meet to be enriched by each other; it is where proper integration takes place.

Relegating religion and cultural diversity to the private sphere prevents integration! In fact, it is a recipe for creating ghettos! I would have thought this was obvious, though she did mention that she would not expect the English to understand!

I suggest that institutions dedicated to health care, social welfare and education, though administered by the State, are also not agencies of the State: they too belong to society, to the people, and therefore should be allowed to reflect society, including its pluralism, and not have to avoid or banish religious and cultural expressions.

Perhaps they should be called "State-run" institutions, not "State institutions".

The professor points out that the French understanding of secularism is a "product" of the French revolution and its rejection of previous forms of authoritarianism (of aristocracy and Church).

True, but that makes it a form of push-back, and a product of negative experience. It needs to move beyond its origins, and become positive. But that requires dialogue at every level, which is what laicite inhibits!

She is surely justified in allowing criticism of other people's views, including religious views, and she is right to say that criticising people's views is not necessarily insulting the people who hold them. But somewhere there is a line between critique and mockery?

It seems to me mere sophistry to say that mocking what is sacred to other people is not disrespecting those people.

Pope Francis' latest encyclical letter (especially chapter 6) is spot on where he talks of the crucial role of dialogue and need for greater respect and kindness within cultures and within politics.

It is within a culture of genuine respect for others, kindness and dialogue, that we instinctively know the difference between critique and mockery, between fair comment and incitement, between free speech and hate speech…

Schnapper is genuinely concerned that some kind of aberration seems to have taken place within Islam. But might she also need to ask whether there is some kind of aberration within the French form of secularism?

• Bishop Peter Cullinane, Bishop Emeritus, Diocese of Palmerston North, New Zealand.

As I reflect on the heartbreaking deadly scene of a Minneapolis police officer pressing his knee into George Floyd's neck for nearly nine extremely long minutes, and recall my harrowing encounter, I have a small, gut-wrenching sense of the fright Floyd must have felt when he cried out "I can't breathe!"

As reported by Democracy Now, friends of Floyd said that he was a mentor to young African American men in Houston where he grew up. He preached "peace, love, God, unity, advocating against gun violence" said Corey Paul, a Houston hip-hop artist who ministered with Floyd.

On Pentecost Sunday, I participated with about 150 black, white, young and elderly people in two peaceful protests in Dorchester County, Md. - where the famous Underground Railroad conductor Harriet Tubman was born and enslaved.

While most of the other protests throughout the U.S. and world were also peaceful, several were violent - tragically causing more innocent deaths and many small businesses being destroyed.

Violence, in all its many evil forms - including riots - is always harmful and hurtful. Violence is never the answer!
Pope Francis said "The violence of recent nights is self-destructive and self-defeating. Nothing is gained by violence and much is lost."

But in order to end violence, we must seriously probe its root-causes. And to that end the Holy Father also said, "My friends, we cannot tolerate or turn a blind eye to racism and exclusion in any form and yet claim to defend the sacredness of every human life."

In his article "The Psychology of Rioting: The Language of the Unheard" at Psychology Today, Dr. Joe Pierre, M.D. writes, "Denouncing symptoms of disease without treating the root cause is bad medicine. … The root cause in this case is systemic racism."

From 1619, when kidnapped Africans were brought for the first time to what would later become the U.S., to the brutal death of George Floyd, it is beyond dispute that countless African Americans have been, and still are, the victims of systemic racism.

Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., who consistently preached and lived Gospel nonviolence, said in his 1967 "The Other America" speech "I will always continue to say, that riots are socially destructive and self-defeating. I'm still convinced that nonviolence is the most potent weapon available to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom and justice."

"It is as necessary for me to be as vigorous in condemning the conditions which cause persons to feel that they must engage in riotous activities as it is for me to condemn riots. I think America must see that riots do not develop out of thin air."

But in the final analysis, a riot is the language of the unheard."

"America has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility, and the status quo than about justice, equality, and humanity … Social justice and progress are the absolute guarantors of riot prevention."

Please also watch "Race Matters: America in Crisis."

And kindly consider prayerfully reading the 2018 U.S. Catholic bishops' pastoral letter against racism "Open Wide Our Hearts: the enduring call to love".

Beginning their letter the bishops quote from Scripture's First Letter of John, "See what love the Father has bestowed on us that we may be called the children of God. Yet so we are."

Loving Father, open wide our hearts that we may truly know and live this truth!

• Tony Magliano is an internationally syndicated Catholic social justice and peace columnist. He is available to speak at diocesan or parish gatherings. Tony can be reached at tmag6@comcast.net.

In 2003, after the SARS epidemic, attempts were made to introduce a national security law.

Similarly, it is happening now as the coronavirus recedes. But this time we fear there will be no happy ending.

It is difficult to find words that we have not already written to tell about the danger Hong Kong is facing.

For some, we are alarmists: the tanks have not been seen in Hong Kong, and therefore we can think that things have not got out of hand.

The world has its head elsewhere, and we seem repetitive.

On May 18, 15 well-known leaders of the democratic opposition appeared in court. Their case will be resumed on June 15. For five of them, including our friend Lee Cheuk-yan, the charges have been extended, and they foresee very severe penalties, up to five years of imprisonment.

But the worst news comes from Beijing, where the National People's Congress has been formally endorsing what has already been decided by the Central Committee of the Communist Party, the real body that governs China.

But even the Central Committee (politburo) counts less since President Xi Jinping concentrated all powers on himself, as only Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping had done in the past.

It is therefore a decision by Xi that we are talking about.

A bill has been introduced that sends a chill down the backs of those who love Hong Kong, its young students and its people, freedom and democracy.

The new law introduces national security regulations in Hong Kong. It will be included as a new "third annex" to the Basic Law, the mini-constitution that governs the "high degree of autonomy" of the city.

The law, which consists of seven articles, provides provisions punishing offenses such as treason, secession, sedition, subversion and foreign interference.

It is not difficult to imagine how the provisions will be conveniently used to suppress the popular protests that began in June 2019 and any other form of opposition.

With such laws in China, every form of dissent is condemned, with punishments up to the death penalty.

Particularly disturbing is the fourth article: "If necessary, the central government will establish bodies in Hong Kong with the task of implementing the safeguarding of national security."

This provision would lead to the emptying of the power of parliament and of the local government in favour of an entirely political office, which has never been seen in Hong Kong.

The drastic downsizing of the parliament is particularly concerning because in the elections due in September the opposition parties will have, according to all forecasts, a larger representation, as happened for the district elections of last November.

It will be the end of the "one country, two systems" framework and the "high degree of autonomy," the two principles that govern Hong Kong today.

We will have important tests in the coming weeks: the vigil for the massacre in Tiananmen Square on June 4; the first anniversary of the start of the protests on June 9; and the traditional protest march of July 1.

Can they be done? And how?

In the summer of 2003, as many certainly remember, attempts were made to introduce a national security law.

It happened in the aftermath of the SARS epidemic. But the then chief executive, the Beijing-appointed Tung Chee-hwa, withdrew the proposal after a single mass demonstration on July 1 of that fateful year. Various ministers resigned, and Tung himself paid the political price with his early departure from the political scene — a choice that restored some dignity to the man. And Hong Kong, for many more years, was saved.

Today's government, led by Carrie Lam, has faced hundreds of demonstrations, most of them more immense than that of July 1, 2003.

Carrie Lam, 'I am writing it with pain', will go down in Hong Kong history as the single political figure that has done the most damage ever.

There has been a new pandemic, and plans are back to introduce a liberticidal law that will not only prevent Hong Kong from having what it was promised — a progressive and full democratisation — but would also remove what it already has now.

Lam rushed to say that the Hong Kong government will "fully cooperate" in the implementation of this law.

The education minister says students will have to study it well.

There is a shiver!

Allan Lee, a long-time politician from the business world, founder of the Liberal Party and part of the pro-Chinese camp (he had been a communist as a boy), recently died.

He was perhaps little known internationally but in Hong Kong he was a familiar face.

I remember him well. He had the good of Hong Kong at heart: after the demonstration on July 1, 2003, he pledged to persuade Beijing to desist from the implementation of the national security law.

He had courage.

He was heard.

And Allan Lee, who in the meantime had become a moderate right-wing man, spent the last years of his life asking for full democracy and freedom for Hong Kong.

Today the pro-government camp lacks men with Allan Lee's wisdom.

In power today we have figures without political dignity and without courage, opportunists enslaved to the power of the strongest.

It is not true that democracy in Hong Kong is only wanted by "reckless young people" and "opponents without a sense of responsibility."

Hong Kong's democracy and freedom are a serious matter, desired by the best people of our beloved city.

After all, it is not difficult too difficult to understand what's going on.

Things are what they seem.

The threats of a regime opposed to freedom, democracy and human rights are not intended to strike emptily.

As long as possible, we will say it: the end of Hong Kong is being prepared.

• Father Gianni Criveller of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions is dean of studies and a teacher at PIME International Missionary School of Theology in Milan, Italy. He taught in Greater China for 27 years and is a lecturer in mission theology and the history of Christianity in China at the Holy Spirit Seminary College of Philosophy and Theology in Hong Kong.
• First published in UCANews.com. Republished with permission.

"On this Day, we reaffirm our unwavering support for the victims of violence based on religion and belief. And we demonstrate that support by doing all in our power to prevent such attacks and demanding that those responsible are held accountable," said UN Secretary-General, António Guterres in a message for the occasion.

The annual observance was adopted by the General Assembly on 28 May 2019, in response to an increasing number of attacks against individuals and groups, targeted simply because of their religion or belief, around the world. Read more

The man wrote in his request he had converted to Christianity because it is a peaceful faith. However, the Independent reports Britain's Home Office's refusal letter cited several biblical passages, including the book of Revelation, to say the Bible was "inconsistent" with his claim.

The man's caseworker tweeted he'd never seen anything like this used to refuse asylum. Read more

Many caravan members say they cannot make ends meet in their home countries due to low wages, extortion or unemployment, says Nathanael Bacon, a Catholic deacon who lives in Guatemala.

The faith leaders are calling on US President Donald Trump and other US officials to stop using the caravan as a political pawn.

They want to ensure due process for asylum seekers and treat all migrants with respect.

They also say the current US trade policy, land reform and non-military aid solutions need examination.

"Nobody wants to leave their homeland. Nobody wants to leave their culture. Nobody wants to leave their family. It's something they're forced to do," says Daniel St. Laurent who serves the chaplain at the Juticalpa Campus of the Catholic University of Honduras.

If Central Americans are to be able to remain in their home country, faith leaders say the US needs to recognise how it has contributed to instability, violence and poverty in the region and take steps to address those root causes of migration.

"As a country, we should be much more compassionate but also smarter," said Bacon, who works with InnerCHANGE, an ecumenical Christian order that cares for the poor.

"We're so uncreative, building up systems that only benefit security firms, the apparatus in the detention centres. If we could reinvest that in a way that's creative and compassionate, we might be able to reduce the number of folks that are forced to migrate."

Source

• National Catholic Reporter
• The Catholic Spirit
• Image: Insider

Shocking stories from 1,250 women, told during a month-long online survey, were released on Monday:

• Almost half of the respondents considered taking their own life at least once
• Most had self-harmed
• The majority of the women linked their self-harming to their experiences of intimate partner violence

"The worst was the psychological abuse," reports one woman.

"He loved to strangle me, spit in my face, call me names, and pour alcohol over me.

"He got a thrill from degrading me.

"The physical abuse was easier to deal with - bruises heal."

Women's Refuge chief executive, Dr Ang Jury, calls the survey result "astonishing."

She said reading the survey made her feel quite sick.

"We know that experience of intimate partner violence has serious mental health effects.

"We know it creates a sense of worthlessness and that it is logically attached to self-harm and feeling suicidal.

"But knowing those things in an intuitive sense and actually having the sorts of stories and accounts that women provided in this survey made it very real in a way I hadn't expected.

"These women were making very clear links between what they were experiencing and what it led them to do - self-harm and suicide attempts - and it was really raw."

Jury says that, while most women had received professional help, they still felt there were hefty barriers to disclosing the violence or suicidal feelings.

One woman wrote: "I told the first doctor I saw that I had thoughts of suicide. They told me to come back if I'd attempted it."

A number of survey respondents feared risking the loss of their children.

Jury said the survey established the clear need to spend more time and effort into getting more long-term support for women who leave abusive relationships.

The survey also looked into the respondents' history of abuse and discovered more than 90 per cent had experienced multiple forms of abuse in childhood.

Need help?

Crisisline: 0800 REFUGE or 0800 733 843
Lifeline - 0800 543 354 or (09) 5222 999 within Auckland
Samaritans - 0800 726 666
Suicide Crisis Helpline - 0508 828 865 (0508 TAUTOKO)

• Source: Stuff

While this is not a new idea — religious passions have long been deemed suspect for their potential to causes divisions — the notion that religion is intrinsically violence-inducing has become much more deeply ingrained in recent times.

This image of religion as a primary propagator of violence runs strangely counter to a lot of influential theorising about religion.

From Émile Durkheim and Max Weber onward, religion has been seen as a mechanism for binding people together. Some scholars even think the term ‘religion' comes from the Latin term ‘religare', meaning ‘to bind'.

As with many popular myths, it is worth taking a second look and scratching below the rhetorical surface.

It is worth asking, as bona fide questions: Is religion intrinsically violent?

If not, can this be said of all religions, all of the time, or of just some religions at particular times?

If so, which ones and when? What does New Zealand's experience tell us?

To take these questions seriously, we must also inquire into the inverse set of questions, about the capacity of religion to inspire peace.

The question of peaceful religion is necessary because, of course, peace and violence are clearly directly related to each other.

It is also important to counteract a marked propensity in the media to focus on conflict rather than peace.

A fresh conversation about religion and violence must involve attending to peace.

On the question of peace, as well as that of violence, it is necessary to analyse specific religious traditions, rather than talking in vague terms about a generic ‘religion'.

Different religions can indeed be really quite different, and this includes the ways in which adherents have sought to think through the ethics, practices and visions of peace.

The resources that respective traditions can bring to these matters can be extensive.

Christianity, for example, has a long tradition of affirming the value of striving for peace — in practically the full spectrum of Christian churches. Scriptures, commentaries, encyclicals, theological writings, sermons, art and architecture, liturgies, rituals, histories, hymns and prayers all serve as repositories and resources for normative Christian ethics.

Within these, peace is a consistently prominent and haunting theme.

Peace has been spoken about in passionate ways, its absence has been mourned and its attainment — fleeting as this often has been — has been celebrated and cherished.

Still, merely pointing to the presence of peaceable resources does not help especially much. For, of course, churches haven't always practised peace.

It doesn't take too much digging, both into the past and present, to encounter Christian sacralisations of violence and warfare. So we need to consider how peaceful resources have actually been deployed: how have flesh-and-blood adherents, and their communities and societies, translated peaceable repositories into practice? Continue reading

"Welcome to The River at Tampa Bay Church," signs at the church warn, "right of admission reserved — this is private property. Please know this is not a gun free zone — we are heavily armed — any attempt will be dealt with deadly force — yes we are a church and will protect our people." Continue reading

The auction features high-powered semi-automatic weapons and military memorabilia adorned with Nazi insignia.

Monsignor Gerard Burns says while the arms auction - to be held this weekend at the Kilbirnie school's hall - was entirely legal, his argument was a moral one.

He urged all Catholics - including the college - to more deeply consider Pope Francis' call to look at different ways conflict could be resolved using active non-violent protest.

St Patrick's rector Neal Swindells said the school had hosted the Militaria auctions for about 25 years without incident or outcry from parents or students.

Police would be present at the auction, which took place on a weekend during the school holidays.

Swindells said the hosting of the arms auction was a non-issue that sent no message at all to students about gun culture.

Education Ministry deputy secretary Katrina Casey said the ministry had not received any complaints about the event, and policies around the hiring of school halls were for boards of trustees to make, in compliance with relevant laws.

Burns made his appeal after attending Tuesday's blockade of the annual New Zealand Defence Industry Association forum at Westpac Stadium with about 300 other activists.

As well as being the Vicar-General of the Archdiocese of Wellington, Burns has a lifelong commitment to the social justice movement, to the rights of indigenous peoples and involvement with actions for peace.

For some years, he worked as a priest among the poor in Peru.

He was an official observer at the first free elections to be held in East Timor after the withdrawal of Indonesia.

He has visited Gaza on two occasions, once as a tourist and once as part of an official delegation.

In 2009 he took part in a controversial Wellington protest against Israeli killings in the Palestine territory of Gaza. The protest saw a mixture of blood and red paint spread on an Israeli memorial plaque.

Burns is a Master of International Relations (Victoria University) and has a Diploma in Te Ara Reo Maori (Te Wananga o Aotearoa).

He is on the governance board of Caritas Aotearoa New Zealand and President of Caritas Oceania, a member of the Representative Council of Caritas Internationalis.

He has been appointed by Pope Francis to the Executive Board of Caritas Internationalis.

Source

• Newshub
• Stuff
• The Archdiocese of Wellington
• RNZ
• Catholic Worker
• Image: Flickr

But he also modeled nonviolence by actively confronting injustice and violence, as when he defied the Sabbath laws to heal the disabled, confronted unjust power at the Temple, challenged a throng of assailants accusing a woman of adultery, and, on the night before he died, commanded Peter to put down his sword.

Neither passive nor weak, Jesus' nonviolence is the power of love in action for the well-being of all.

Imagine nurturing a new identity as nonviolent people in a nonviolent church with a clear and deliberate commitment to preaching, teaching, activating, and boldly proclaiming Jesus' nonviolence at every level.

We must return good for evil, break the chains of escalatory violence and revenge, stand up to systemic injustice not with violence but with determined love, and fully trust the God of love and truth rather than the power of violence.

And if the theology and spirituality of gospel nonviolence were more deliberately integrated into the life of the church, we would more clearly recognize the sacred way and work of peace, reconciliation, and nonviolent transformation in our time of monumental crisis and opportunity.

Catholic social thought, including a growing number of recent papal statements and church documents, has increasingly articulated the centrality of gospel nonviolence.

As Pope Benedict XVI put it in a 2007 homily, "Nonviolence, for Christians, is not mere tactical behavior but a person's way of being, the attitude of one who is convinced of God's love and power, who is not afraid to confront evil with the weapons of love and truth alone. Loving the enemy is the nucleus of the ‘Christian revolution.' "

In the same address, the pope declared that nonviolence "does not consist in surrendering to evil—as claims a false interpretation of ‘turn the other cheek' (Luke 6:29)—but in responding to evil with good (Romans 12:17-21), and thus breaking the chain of injustice."

This and many other recent papal declarations—including Pope Francis' 2013 statement that "faith and violence are incompatible"—have helped increase the church's awareness of the nonviolence of Jesus. Continue reading

Sources

• U.S. Catholic article by Ken Butigan, who teaches in the Peace, Justice, and Conflict Studies Program at DePaul University in Chicago.
• Image: neversleeps

How true! This has been going on since the beginning of time and is showing few signs of disappearing any time soon. We still do violence and evil and justify them in God's name.

We see countless examples of this in history. From the time that we first gained self-consciousness, we've done violence in God's name.

It began by sacrificing human persons to try to attain God's favor and it led to everything from actively persecuting others for religious reasons, to waging war in God's name, to burning people for heresy at the Inquisition, to practicing capital punishment for religious reasons, and, not least, at one point in history, to handing Jesus over to be crucified out of our misguided religious fervor.

These are some salient historical examples; sadly not much has changed. Today, in its most gross form, we see violence done in God's name by groups like Al-Qaida and Isis who, whatever else might be their motivation, believe that they are serving God and cleansing the world in God's name by brute terrorism and murder.

The death of thousands of innocent people can be justified, they believe, by the fact that this is God's cause, so sacred and urgent that it allows for the bracketing of all basic standards of humanity, decency, and normal religion. When it's for God's cause, outright evil is rationalized.

Happily, it's impossible for most of us to justify this kind of violence and murder in our minds and hearts, but most of us still justify this kind of sacral violence in more subtle modes.

Many of us, for instance, still justify capital punishment in the name of divine justice, believing that God's purposes demand that we kill someone.

Many too justify abortion by an appeal to our God-given freedoms.

Not least, virtually all of us justify certain violence in our language and discourse because we feel that our cause is so special and sacred that it gives us the right to bracket some of the fundamentals of Christian charity in our dealings with those who disagree with us, namely, respect and graciousness. Continue reading

• Fr. Ron Rolheiser OMI is the President of the Oblate School of Theology in San Antonio Texas.

The Left-wing bookshop where I worked bought boxes of them, mostly lurid black and yellow-covered paperbacks of Robert Burns' jaunty poems about fornication, The Kama Sutra, and The Perfumed Garden.

We possibly made a profit for the first time ever, though these were mostly rather dull clinical descriptions of the contortions you can get into having sex, just to prove it can be done.

They were innocent times. The Joy of Sex appeared, with illustrations of people performing and encouraging - from memory - the wearing of a kind of absurd loincloth arrangement to spice things up.

People huddled over copies of this in their lunch hour, too timid to be seen buying them, too nervous to take them home. I think they thought this was pornography. How quaint we were.

I'd seen the real thing by then, shown to me by older men who little cared how disgusted I was, and what the images showed so explicitly. It wasn't pleasant, it never is, and it didn't have a pleasant effect on me, but the thrill of potentially corrupting young people is irresistible to corrupt adults.

Nothing has changed since, as far as I can see, except that much more degrading images are now freely available everywhere, with the result that some young men's brains get hard-wired with images that degrade women, and none that celebrate affection.

We thought feminism had won the battle for equality only to find young women, who now excel academically, are targets of misogyny that reduces them to sex dolls for male amusement.

The pity of it is that many young women think this is OK. Some boast of being prostitutes to support themselves through degree courses, and somehow we've come to think this is OK.

It's OK, in other words, to be a high achiever so long as you demean yourself at the same time. No harm done. I don't believe it. Continue reading

• Rosemary McLeod is a New Zealand writer, journalist, cartoonist and columnist.

This was one of the solutions offered by participants in Fiji's first ever discussion on crime and violence

Members of faith-based organisations and NGOs gathered in Pacific Harbour in Serua On Wednesday to participate in a three-day dialogue about the root causes of crime and violence

They appear to be on the increase in the rapidly populating Great Suva Area.

Organisers of the talks, Dialogue Fiji, said sexual assault cases were up from 718 cases reported in 2005 to 2714 last year.

There were also noted increase in cases such as theft with 6447 reported last year compared with 3380 in 2005.

Burglary was up from 850 in 2005 to more than 2300 in 2015.

Dialogue Fiji's executive director, Nilesh Lal, said convening independent spaces for dialogue on social issues and facilitating engagement between state, non-state and citizen groups was useful to devising sustainable and effective solutions to issues such as crime.

"Security is an important element of the social contract that citizens have with the state, and with the growing populations and increasing crime incidences, innovative approaches to tackling crime in a rapidly changing landscape is necessary," he said.

"As experiences from other contexts have shown, community engagement can be an effective tool to achieve this."

Dialogue Fiji has been working in the area of inclusive and participatory decision making, democratic transition, good governance, conflict analysis and peace-building since 2009.

Source

• fijitimes.com
• fijitimes.com
• facebook.com
• Image: facebook.com