Martyrdom confounds the modern mind… and how could it not? Living in an age of religious skepticism and scientism, we “enlightened” Westerners are unable to speak the same language or see the same world as the martyr, who found himself or herself unable to abandon their God to purchase comfort and well-being. What are we suppose to make of them? How can we understand their forfeiture of life for a faith that must necessarily be suffused with doubt and uncertainty? It would seem as if our only option, as 21st-century persons who know better than they, is to judge them as foolish, ignorant, and rash. However, if we pause for a moment, then we remember the inconvenient truth that Jesus himself was a martyr, a witness unto death. Can we ignore or denounce the martyr, who conformed himself to the Son of God made man, and still count ourselves as faithful followers of Christ? I believe that because we Catholics have such a difficult time understanding the martyrs, we have a hard time living the truths of Catholic social teaching, and here is why.
Catholic social teaching is not an addendum to the vocation and role of the laity in the world. CST, in fact, is the stuff of what the Catholic and Christian laity ought to be doing throughout their baptismal life. Let us peer into Lumen Gentium #31, the Second Vatican Council’s constitution on the Church
But the laity, by their very vocation, seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and by ordering them according to the plan of God. They live in the world, that is, in each and in all of the secular professions and occupations. They live in the ordinary circumstances of family and social life, from which the very web of their existence is woven. They are called there by God that by exercising their proper function and led by the spirit of the Gospel they may work for the sanctification of the world from within as a leaven.
This “ordering” that the Council Fathers speak of in Lumen Gentium is the essence of Catholic social teaching, which is the Gospel of Christ applied to the human family at large. CST exists to shine light upon the various aspects of society (social, economic, political, etc.) so that we, as faithful disciples of Christ, might work for the betterment and sanctification of the world. It is the fleshing out of God’s command to love our neighbor as ourselves.
Thus, the identity of the Catholic in the modern/post-modern/contemporary world cannot simply be checked at the door of the public square, but it must be confidently and lovingly carried into the communal space that we share with society and the world at large. Just as all are encouraged and given the right to proclaim and work towards what they view as the just and perfect society within the democratic republic, so too must we Catholics not be discouraged in doing so. This is easier said than done, as the unfortunate precedent has already been established by Catholic President John Kennedy in his speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association
But let me stress again that these are my views. For contrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for president. I am the Democratic Party’s candidate for president, who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me.
Whatever issue may come before me as president — on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject — I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.
But if the time should ever come — and I do not concede any conflict to be even remotely possible — when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office; and I hope any conscientious public servant would do the same (italics mine).
At first glance there would not seem to be anything amiss in this historic speech; however, revealed in this oration is the irreconcilable difference between Kennedy and the martyrs. Kennedy’s Catholic identity is an addendum, an appendage, whereas the martyr’s is his life, his everything. Kennedy’s Catholicism is external to his identity whereas the martyr’s is his identity. Kennedy advocates for a life in public divorced from his life in private while the martyr’s life in private leads to his death in public.
Now, this is not to suggest that Kennedy was a terrible person or president but simply to draw out the implications of this schizophrenic type of approach to faith, religion, and identity. Religion, for the vast majority of people and especially in America, is the way in which our consciences’ are formed and shaped to discern good and evil, right and wrong. In the Catholic tradition one’s conscience is an integral part of what it means to be made in the image of God from which he is able to do good and avoid evil. In fact, the very foundation of America’s democracy is the result of the Christian worldview — equality of persons in dignity and rights. However, to claim, first of all, that one’s conscience can act separately from one’s system of morals and religion, is to have a restricted and wacky understanding of conscience. Secondly, to hold conscience as something separate and only narrowly related to Truth and Goodness (about which the Christian religion is centered and whom we believe became incarnate) is to destroy the very foundation upon which one builds one’s “house,” or nation for that matter. Conscience does not derive its grandeur and strength from being able to act contrarily to Truth but in discerning Truth and Goodness and acting in accord with it.
Now, this does not mean that a truly Catholic politician would advocate for the conversion of the country to the Catholic faith and in so doing violate their free will. However, a truly Catholic politician, businessman, economist, lawyer, teacher, custodian, ________ (insert whatever profession you can think of), etc. would always act and advocate in accordance with the goodness discerned, revealed, and understood from the Catholic faith, since it is the correct understanding of the world as it relates to God, the Author and Redeemer of Creation. To authentically live the Catholic faith is to be a witness, a martyr, in every aspect of life and society.
Herein lies our difficulty with understanding and appreciating the martyrs. They live their lives on God’s terms, whereas we so often fall prey to living our lives on a disordered world’s terms. We, at one point or another, stand in the Coliseum of the Public Square but recoil at the insults of the crowds and the roaring of the lions. We are called as Catholics to be of one mind both privately and publicly. With the rejuvenating waters of baptism, we are forever haunted by the words of Christ, who speaks these same words yesterday, today, and forever
“So have no fear of them; for nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing secret that will not become known. What I say to you in the dark, tell in the light; and what you hear whispered, proclaim from the housetops. Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. And even the hairs of your head are all counted. So do not be afraid; you are of more value than many sparrows.
“Everyone therefore who acknowledges me before others, I also will acknowledge before my Father in heaven; but whoever denies me before others, I also will deny before my Father in heaven (Matt 10:26-32).
To love one’s neighbor in a corrupt society will often, but not always, lead to a crucifixion of sorts. Should we expect anything less? Nonetheless, we are called to walk the same path that our forefathers have tread — faithfulness, love, and witness i.e., martyrdom. We ought to continually clothe ourselves in the promise of eternal life from the Lord, who is faithful to end, and to remember that our life is not our own, but we were purchased with a price. And this is why we tend to have such great struggle understanding and appreciating the martyr. Have we given our lives totally over to Christ, or are we still holding something back? Is our worldview a direct result of our life-shaping faith, or is it a nice addition when convenient but otherwise put to the back-burner? Do we consider ourselves Republicans or Democrats first and Catholics second, or is our Catholic identity unable to be neatly defined with the typical categories?
In the Catholic Church we are blessed with striking examples of disciples of Christ who refused to disobey their baptismal promises to their God in the face of impending death. Such examples are numerous and include the likes of St. Stephen, St. Ignatius of Antioch, and St. Thomas More. Let us close with two piercing writings from St. Ignatius of Antioch, who was consecrated bishop of Antioch by St. Peter himself and wrote seven letters to neighboring Christian communities on his path to martyrdom.
“Permit me to imitate my suffering God… I am God’s wheat and I shall be ground by the teeth of beasts, that I may become the pure bread of Christ.”
“It is not that I want merely to be called a Christian, but to actually be one. Yes, if I prove to be one, then I can have the name…Come fire, cross, battling with wild beasts, wrenching of bones, mangling of limbs, crushing of my whole body, cruel tortures of the Devil–Only let me get to Jesus Christ!”
6 thoughts on “Martyrdom, John F. Kennedy and Catholic Social Teaching”
Pingback: Linus & St. Luke, Say It All About Christmas - BigPulpit.com
I would give JFK the benefit of the doubt.
I think he was taking a “Morean” line amongst a den of vipers. If JFK believed in Church teaching I think it is legitimate to say what he said. Like More he was in an impossible situation and like More he said what he could say in order to survive, though only politically and not literally. If he did not believe in Church teaching then what he said can be taken another way. It depends on whether you hold that he was speaking personally or on behalf of all.
I think most tend to view him through the lens of his youngest brother whereas I prefer to view him through the lens of Eunice, who was very close to him and defended him to the last. I would argue that she is an vivid example of someone living out authentic CST.
More tenuously but arguably he knew he was signing his own death warrant when he signed a series of executive orders that would have led to the disbandment of the CIA and the Federal Reserve. Perhaps this was his own martyrdom.
He lived in bigoted times, not unlike today but unfortunately those who defend the norms of millennia are now classed as the bigots.
“I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me.” If he had fully internalized Church teaching, why would he say, “the Church does not speak for me?” A good Catholic might not feel comfortable with his parish priest or even his bishop speaking for him, since those men can be in error, but he can trust the Church Herself more than he trusts himself.
“… I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates.” So *maybe* he has internalized those religious pressures and dictates — but he clearly does not want his Protestant listeners to think that. Can you really save his character by making him dishonest?
I believe one can fully agree with Church teaching and say the Church does not speak for me. Its part of the freedom of the Christian, and perhaps avoids clericalism.
I don’t think he’s being dishonest as he has no obligation to disclose what he thinks to his listeners. Being politically astute is not necessarily being dishonest. As I said perhaps he was following a “Morean” line. I’m not trying to save his character but I do think the worst assassination he suffered was that of his character.
The Church is, as I pointed out, not exactly the same as any one cleric, so this really has nothing to do with clericalism. At the same time, this bit about “X does not speak for me” is never introduced except to mean, “I reserve the right to disagree with X.” If you are convinced that X is truthful and accurate, and YOU YOURSELF wish to be truthful and accurate, you will not have a problem with identifying with X.
Stop it with the “Morean” line. It’s simply hogwash. JFK wanted something, and even if he had his fingers crossed behind his back, he certainly intended his audience to understand that he was prepared to defy the Church if that was necessary to hold presidential power. The more you try to come up with imaginative excuses, the more you simply draw attention to one of the most despicable things he ever did.
Great article Jordan. I am always amazed that someone as young as you can be so focused and competent. Could God have anything to do with it?