Suchergebnisse

The United States holds dear our values of democracy, civil liberties, and the separation of the branches of our government. In fact, every member of our armed services has sworn an oath to defend the parchment that declares these institutions sacred, and it is the obligation of the United States Armed Forces to preserve and protect those democratic liberties which we hold dear. Given this, it is surprising to know that US Army doctrine idolizes a military dictator, who knowingly seized complete control of his home state following political unrest. Intriguingly, this same figure, who was revered by his soldiers and that same state he commandeered, struggled with marital and familial conflicts his entire life. These statements may be confusing, as there couldn't have possible been a military coup in the United States, let alone a leader of that coup who is still beloved by his statesmen today. Ironically, this individual is no other than Civil War hero Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. While the aforementioned facts are not popularly discussed in history, many Americans know and recognize Chamberlain and his contribution to the United States. He is remembered for his actions in battle which earned him the Medal of Honor later in life. Joshua L. Chamberlain is undoubtedly one of the most popularly researched and written figures in the American Civil War era. Moreover, there are a multitude of sources that further my research, answering the question of how Chamberlain was remembered during and after the war compared to evidence of the life he lived. Upon examination of several key books and articles that discuss the memory of Chamberlain, from during the war to the modern day, a baseline literature review can be made regarding the question as well as its answer. These selected works have all contributed to the field regarding Joshua Chamberlain and how he is remembered both in his own time and our modern age. ; Winner of the 2022 Friends of the Kreitzberg Library Award for Outstanding Research in the Senior Arts/Humanities category. ; Investigating Joshua L. Chamberlain; Distinctions Between the Memory and Reality of Maine's Famed Colonel Jacob Maker HI 430 A Professor Sodergren 12 December 2021 1 The United States holds dear our values of democracy, civil liberties, and the separation of the branches of our government. In fact, every member of our armed services has sworn an oath to defend the parchment that declares these institutions sacred, and it is the obligation of the United States Armed Forces to preserve and protect those democratic liberties which we hold dear. Given this, it is surprising to know that US Army doctrine idolizes a military dictator, who knowingly seized complete control of his home state following political unrest. Intriguingly, this same figure, who was revered by his soldiers and that same state he commandeered, struggled with marital and familial conflicts his entire life. These statements may be confusing, as there couldn't have possible been a military coup in the United States, let alone a leader of that coup who is still beloved by his statesmen today. Ironically, this individual is no other than Civil War hero Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. While the aforementioned facts are not popularly discussed in history, many Americans know and recognize Chamberlain and his contribution to the United States. He is remembered for his actions in battle which earned him the Medal of Honor later in life. Joshua L. Chamberlain is undoubtedly one of the most popularly researched and written figures in the American Civil War era. Moreover, there are a multitude of sources that further my research, answering the question of how Chamberlain was remembered during and after the war compared to evidence of the life he lived. Upon examination of several key books and articles that discuss the memory of Chamberlain, from during the war to the modern day, a baseline literature review can be made regarding the question as well as its answer. These selected works have all contributed to the field regarding Joshua Chamberlain and how he is remembered both in his own time and our modern age. Academic books such as Hands of Providence by Alice Rains Trulock, John Pullen's Twentieth Maine, and Conceived in Liberty by Mark Perry portray Chamberlain in a prolific 2 light. They all generally revere him, initiating their books with praise calling him "a great American hero and a genuinely good man," as well as "remarkable" and a "graceful gentleman".1 Not only do these historians hold these ideals, but the US Army and other agencies openly promote Chamberlain for his heroics without analyzing the reality of who he was holistically.2 Hands of Providence is one of the more prolific biographies describing Chamberlain and the 20th Maine. Trulock writes of his life before, during, and after his war service. She accurately illustrates how Chamberlain's colleagues at Bowdoin, as well as others in his life, regarded him early in the war.3 Comparatively, she notes statements from his soldiers about how they viewed him during the war, both in good and bad lights.4 Pullen does the same, but instead focuses mainly on the unit instead of its commander. This also allows for more in-depth analysis of how his men, and soldiers of the Confederacy, viewed Chamberlain.5 He also describes his work ethic, intelligence, and leadership characteristics regarding how they effected his colonelcy and command during the war. Conceived in Liberty differentiates from the other works because it primarily focuses on the two commanders at Little Round Top and their lives before, during, and after the war. This includes some of the more unsavory events that Trulock and Perry omit, particularly how Chamberlain's home life regarding his wife Fannie's disappointment in their marriage.6 The mentioning of this, as well as information about the abovementioned 1880 affair make this source stand apart from the others.7 1 Trulock, Hands of Providence, xvii; Pullen, Twentieth Maine, 3. 2 United States Department of Defense, "Medal of Honor Monday," https://www.defense.gov/News/Feature-Stories/story/Article/2086560/medal-of-honor-monday-army-maj-gen-joshua-chamberlain/ [accessed 3 November 2021]; Weart, "Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain," https://themilitaryleader.com/leadership-action-chamberlain/ [accessed 3 November 2021]. 3 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 11; Trulock, Hands of Providence, 57; Trulock, Hands of Providence, 105. 4 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 305. 5 Pullen, Twentieth Maine, 128. 6 Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 4; Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 42; Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 333. 7 Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 387-392. 3 Edward Longacre's The Soldier and the Man is an interesting contradictory source. Instead of constant praise for Chamberlain, Longacre credits him for both his good and poor actions during the war. He calls into question his ego and insecurities, selfish desires for greatness above all else, and indifference towards soldiers to include ordering their execution.8 Longacre writes this from a different perspective, that of truth regarding Chamberlain's life both good and bad. There have also been two articles that discuss Chamberlain and his leadership both written by military officers. The first is "Leadership as a Force Multiplier" by Lieutenant Colonel Fred Hillyard, and the second is "Blood and Fire", written by Major John Cuddy. Hillyard focuses on Chamberlain's leadership characteristics while deeming if he deserves the high pedestal he is placed upon, while Cuddy analyzes how different scholars understood Chamberlain and his leadership philosophy. They both state how Chamberlain has been designated as a symbol of leadership within the military and agree that he received all his knowledge from his commander, Colonel Ames, who was West Point educated.9 Furthermore, they consider Chamberlain in a favorable light by calling him a military genius.10 This differs from other sources in that it outright debates his poor attributes instead of assuming him to be an admirable figure. These articles exemplify the dichotomy of reality and fiction regarding how Chamberlain is remembered. This literature provides insight on the dichotomy of thought regarding Chamberlain, with the more mainstream historians, like Trulock, Pullen, and Perry picturing him as an idyllic, humble, and professional gentlemen who represented the best of Federal officers. This is countered by more modern writers, such as Longacre, Hillyard, and Cuddy, understanding that 8 Longacre, The Soldier and the Man, 100; Longacre, The Soldier and the Man, 118. 9 Hillyard, "Force Multiplier", 4. 10 Cuddy, "Blood and Fire", 2. 4 Chamberlain was by no means perfect, and his flaws should be investigated as much as his successes. Chamberlain's life and legacy is extremely important because it effects how we remember him and his actions during the Civil War. Popular history tells us of Chamberlain's battlefield heroics and of his gentlemanly manner both in and out of battle. Yet, what has not been compiled popularly is the reality of his life, and the memory associated with it. Growing up in Maine, learning about Chamberlain and his regiment was common, mainly as a high point in Maine's history. However, it is increasingly important to recognize who our leaders and heroes were in their lives and hold them accountable for both the good and bad things they did over the course of their lives. Throughout the research, Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain was viewed in high regard by both his adversaries and peers during the Civil War, as well as in his post-war politics, continuing into today's popular history. Yet, there are differing opinions that emerge over time regarding whether his political skills were as impressive as portrayed as well as how multiple personal issues plagued him and his ability to execute the offices bestowed upon him. *** Joshua Chamberlain came from a respected family in Brewer, Maine, outside of Bangor. In the Bangor area, and later Brunswick, Chamberlain and his relatives were regarded as model citizens who held dear to principles of toughness, work ethic, and democratic values.11 He was raised with these morals and sought after them in his personal and professional life. Concepts of honesty and integrity became trademarks of the family, with his parents expecting those attributes from the Chamberlain children.12 Educated in religion at the Bangor Seminary as well 11 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 57; Longacre, The Soldier and the Man, 16. 12 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 57. 5 as traditionally at Bowdoin, he garnered a reputation as an astute academic who was a stickler for the rules and lived by a code of honor.13 Despite his found success in the classroom, Chamberlain had always fancied a military lifestyle, devoting one term of school at the Whiting Military Academy in 1843, as well as participating in several musters with the Maine Militia before entering service in the Civil War.14 Soon after his schooling, Chamberlain accepted a position as a professor at his alma mater, Bowdoin College. He influenced and instructed students on rhetoric and language prior to the war, even writing recommendations and using his political sway to help students gain commissions and enlistments.15 Eventually, his longing to serve coincided with the nation's necessity for leadership. Joshua Chamberlain's contributions to the preservation of the Union are undoubted, yet the perception of him by peers before and in the early years of the conflict indicate dissenting opinions from his popular reference as a revered leader by all. With the nation at war, Chamberlain's desire to serve increased daily as students graduated, or dropped their academics, and enlisted to serve the Union. In envy, Chamberlain utilized his familial and academic connections to pen a letter to the Governor of Maine, Israel Washburn. In this letter he states, "I have always been interested in military matters, and what I do not know in that line I know how to learn", pleading with the governor to allow a man with no military background or training a chance to command.16 Having claimed to be taking sabbatical in Europe, his colleagues detested his notion to leave Bowdoin and sent letters to the Governor urging him to not grant Chamberlain a commission declaring him to be "'no fighter, but only a mild-mannered common student'", "'nothing at all'", and "'good for nothing'".17 Evidently, despite he and his family's 13 Longacre, The Soldier and the Man, 20, 25-26. 14 Longacre, The Soldier and the Man, 18, 53. 15 Nespitt, Through Blood & Fire, 17. 16 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Nespitt, Through Blood & Fire, 9. 17 Colleagues at Bowdoin, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 11. 6 reputation throughout Maine, some harbored public doubts about his ability to lead men into battle, mainly because he was thought to be needed more in his role as a Professor at Bowdoin than in the army by some. Contrarily, there were others who supported Chamberlain's military ambitions full-heartedly. Brunswick's reputable physician, Dr. John D. Lincoln, wrote on Chamberlain's behalf, declaring him to be "'as capable of commanding… as any man out of… West Point" and that the enlisted men would surely "'rally around his standard as they would around a hero.'"18 It wasn't just family friends who supported Chamberlain, local newspapers deemed him "a capable and efficient officer" both fit for battle and the lieutenant colonelcy of the 20th Maine.19 The political sway of the his physician as well as the admirability of local press convinced Governor Washburn to grant Chamberlain's commission, yet opting instead to place West Point educated Adelbert Ames of Rockland as commander of the unit due to Chamberlain's lack of field experience and general military knowledge.20 Although there was noted dissent regarding his commission, his soldiers and fellow officers attest to his leadership attributes both under fire and while encamped. In accordance with what Dr. Lincoln wrote to Governor Washburn, he was commended by his troops as being "idolized" within the unit for his stature and leadership, unlike Ames who was viewed as tyrannical and cruel to his men.21 The men of the 20th Maine were driven towards Chamberlain's sympathetic, more egalitarian leadership style, as Ames gave his men no respect believing that military hierarchy should be placed above all else. The men of the unit rejected this, as in Maine 18 Lincoln, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 11-12. 19 "Letter from the State Capitol," Portland Daily Press. 20 Longacre, The Soldier and the Man, 55. 21 Pullen, Twentieth Maine, 77. 7 they and their commander stood evenly on the social scale.22 Colonel Ames was detested for his constant drill and disrespect for his men, being proclaimed by his soldiers as a "'savage" whose "'men would surely shoot him'" when drawn into battle.23 Ames was blissfully unaware of these thoughts, but Chamberlain relished his public perception and continued to care deeply about his men and by extension his image. By default, the volunteers fell on Chamberlain for support and assurance, as they distrusted their Colonel. Chamberlain proved himself militarily at Fredericksburg, and most notably Gettysburg, as a great military officer and tactician. Although his actions are known and renowned, the perspective of him by others during battle is paramount to understanding how he was perceived. For example, over the course of the war Colonel Ames forced many of his regiment's officers to resign due to poor performance and lack of leadership, yet he referred to Chamberlain as his "'best officer'" who led from the front and modeled honor and bravery for his unit.24 Soldiers testified to an instance where his academic and military intelligence united to deceive the enemy by pretending to be a Confederate under the cover of darkness, fooling the enemy into believing the Union line was far away.25 They also pronounced his leadership as something that should be exemplified, as he refused to order his men into unnecessary danger and would not give them orders he would not execute himself.26 This praise was not solely from his soldiers, but other officers from around the army. The commanding general of the Fifth Corps, General Sykes, congratulated him after Gettysburg by saying that the actions of the 20th Maine, and Chamberlain's leadership thereof, were the most 22 Loski, Chamberlains of Brewer, 15. 23 Thomas Chamberlain, as quoted in Loski, Chamberlains of Brewer, 15. 24 Ames, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 105. 25 Pullen, Twentieth Maine, 57. 26 Pullen, Twentieth Maine, 80; Trulock, Hands of Providence, 151. 8 important to occur during the battle and that if Little Round Top was lost so was the Union cause.27 His direct superior, Colonel Rice, declared "'your gallantry was magnificent, and your coolness and skill saved us.'" indicating a consensus amongst all involved that Chamberlain's actions were valiant and noble placing him amongst the army's most superb officers.28 His subordinates and supervisors agreed that Chamberlain was an exceptional officer, which is something to note considering some officers, like General Thomas, were liked by their men and hated by their leaders. While it is not surprising that comrades of Chamberlain praised him, the reactions and testimonies of his enemies are important as well. Colonel William Oates was the commander of the opposing 15th Alabama at Little Round Top, and remarkably only had good things to say about Chamberlain. Oates stated that the decisiveness taken by the 20th Maine made them the hardest fighting unit he had ever seen, and that their "'gallant Colonel'" possessed exorbitant amounts of "'skill and… great bravery'" that saved the Union from defeat.29 Another anonymous soldier recollected on how, during Little Round Top, he had a clear line of sight on Chamberlain, yet felt a strong feeling not to fire upon him. He adhered to this feeling, and later expressed how glad he was that he hadn't killed him in a letter to Chamberlain.30 However, it was not only units involved in direct conflict against Chamberlain that respected him. During the surrender at Appomattox, Confederate Major General John B. Gordon stated that the officer from Maine was "'one of the knightliest soldiers of the Federal army'" because of the respect Chamberlain had bestowed upon the surrendering forces.31 Instead of 27 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 155. 28 Rice, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 155; Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 271. 29 Oates, as quoted in Pullen, Twentieth Maine, 128. 30 Pullen, Twentieth Maine, 122. 31 Gordon, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 305. 9 humiliating the men as they laid down their weapons, Chamberlain ensured that they were treated fairly, yet still making it known who the victor was. In postwar years, editions of the Confederate Veteran painted Chamberlain in a similar fashion. They tell of how brilliant he and his unit were in battle, over 35 years after the end of hostilities.32 The magazine makes it known how great of a leader Confederate soldiers believed he was. In fact, he is cited as representing the Federal Army in 1913 at a monument dedication in Chattanooga, Tennessee. This reconciliatory monument represented the peace between the states by inscribing the names of both Confederate and Federal war dead. Furthermore, Chamberlain attended as a "distinguished soldier" and gentlemen in the eyes of former Confederates.33 It is common for friendly forces to recognize the brilliance of successful military actions; yet surprising that enemy combatants also revered Chamberlain and his actions despite their catastrophic impact on the Confederate war effort. Chamberlain is remembered after the war for his accolades as a representative of Maine while pursuing political aspirations and maintaining public appearances, yet his support never faltered, and he remained generally well respected despite familial disputes and marital issues that troubled his private life. Politically savvy since his days as a professor, Chamberlain made the jump from wartime commander to state executive in a matter of years after the conclusion of hostilities. An indication of his popularity with the people of Maine, he was elected with the largest majority of any gubernatorial candidate in his first election. He ran on the promise to ratify the 14th and 15th amendments, all while ensuring the former Confederacy paid for their sins while earning their right of federal representation. 34 32 "About a Distinguished Southern Family," Confederate Veteran. 33 "Herbert Head of Peace Memorial", Confederate Veteran. 34 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 337. 10 Chamberlain desired "'suspension of certain privileges'" and "'certain rights'" for former Confederates, of which he believed had been relinquished by waging war. 35 He appealed to Congress, arguing that war is not a game, therefore the losers should be held accountable for their transgressions. He was known for a conservative streak compared to other Republicans, which itself angered those radicals in Maine politics. For example, he publicly argued against allowing suffrage to freedmen, claiming it to be too much of a change too quickly.36 He also supported Maine's conservative senator in voting against the impeachment of Andrew Jackson, an obvious minority opinion in fiercely liberal Republican politics. 37 He was never a practical politician, but his neglect of party viewpoints disgruntled leaders within Republican forums. This was different from other reconstruction leaders, as many focused-on reconciliation instead of punishment and often sided with the powerful postwar party. Although popular among the citizens of the state, he was unprepared for the life of a politician. In essence, he was not prepared for dissenting opinion, and outright disregard for his point of view at times, as he was at this point used to military reverence for the commanders orders. He fought with the legislature on several issues, mainly temperance and the legality of capital punishment in the state, but also found common ground and gained support from both parties.38 Previous legislations had proposed and supported temperance committees that oversaw laws regulating alcohol use and distribution. They established "special police", which Chamberlain declared an unconstitutional infringement on the rights of Mainers.39 He wrote to the legislature describing his dissatisfaction regarding this bill yet felt it his duty as executive to 35 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 338. 36 Longacre, The Soldier and the Man, 264. 37 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 338. 38 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 338. 39 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 338; Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 25. 11 sign it nevertheless due to its success in the legislature.40 He angered many within the state with his conduct regarding this issue, refusing to attend temperance meetings and denying them public forums. Chamberlain took his position as governor quite literally, as is evident by his signing of bills he disagreed with instead of vetoing them. He believed it was his, and the government of Maine's, responsibility to enact and therefore enforce law. By extension, he brought this same fervor to the capital punishment debate saying that laws should either change or be enforced. He is quoted saying, "'If we cannot make our practice conform to our law, [we must] make our law agree with our practice'".41 This debate had been raging far before Chamberlain was Governor, with his predecessors simply tabling execution authorizations as it was state law the Governor had to authorize each death with a signature. Furthermore, he used his executive power to commute sentences, but insisted on carrying out many of them considering it, again, his elected duty.42 He confided in his mother that "'many are bitter on me about capital punishment but it does not disturb me in the least'", continuing to describe that some had sent threatening letters in response to his ordering of the executions. 43 He responded calmly "'The poor fool for whomever thinks he can scare me… is mistaken… I do not have a particle of fear in me of anything that walks or flies,'" assuring his mother of his safety.44 His administration was not without success, as garnered support on several important issues. Chamberlain's exoneration of Civil War veterans with pardons received support from both parties, and the people as well.45 Furthermore, the establishment of the Maine's agriculture 40 Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 79; Smith, Fanny and Joshua, 197. 41 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 339. 42 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 339. 43 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 75. 44 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 75. 45 Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 71. 12 academy, the predecessor of the University of Maine, under his administration again excited the people and both political parties.46 This school created another avenue of education for Maine's youth, one not affiliated directly with the little ivy elite of Bowdoin, Bates, and Colby Colleges. Despite his immense popularity, and the fact that both parties supported him in a fifth term, Mainers typically regarded him as an ineffective politician.47 Today, he is not remembered for his political career or exploits, with historians and everyday people recognizing him for his war exploits. Unbeknownst to the public, while Chamberlain pursued political and public aspirations, his family was disintegrating. Not only did he and Fannie have marital issues, but his siblings all experienced turmoil that was directly and indirectly caused by the patriarch's endeavors. During the war, it was known that Fannie and Chamberlain were often at odds regarding their marriage and the direction of their lives. While she begrudgingly supported her husband's military endeavors, she was often distant during the war and hoped that when he returned to Maine he would settle down and make time for her.48 According to letters between the two, it appears that Fannie would often neglect to return letters to Chamberlain, saying he had sent seven letters by October of 1862 compared to receiving only two from his wife.49 This pattern continues throughout the war with Chamberlain asking "'Where are you… I do not hear from you all this long while?. It is more than a month that I have heard a word from you?'".50 Fannie and Chamberlain's marriage was strained by the distance and lack of communication during the war, yet his issues would also follow him into his post-war career. 46 Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 25. 47 Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 25. 48 Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 333. 49 Nespitt, Through Blood & Fire, 23. 50 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Desjardin, Life in Letters, 184. 13 Fannie understood how tenaciously ambitious her husband was. He was a man of perception, and it came to no surprise to her that he accepted the Republican nomination and subsequent election as governor. Unlike her support during the war, Fannie made it clear she did not and would not encourage him in this undertaking, as she felt neglected as a wife.51 She felt so strongly about this, she refused to accompany her husband in Augusta, instead opting to stay in Brunswick. He missed her dearly and wanted to share his experience as governor with her pleading, "'we are getting rather lonesome without you…'" while encouraging her to accompany him saying "'we are having some quite pleasant times, only you are wanting to complete our happiness.'"52 Still, despite his proposed love and longing for his wife, their marriage continued to decline throughout his term to the point of abuse accusations and threats of divorce. Fannie, extremely unhappy with her marriage by 1868, released public statements alleging physical and mental abuse during their marriage. Chamberlain's response was chilling, saying "'if it were not you… I should make quick work of these calumniaters…'".53 Seeming more concerned with his public image than his marriage or the state of his wife, he says his enemies will "'ruin'" him when they catch hold of the allegations.54 Chamberlain scolded her like a child, warning her of the perils that faced widows in their society, as well as the unsought humiliation a separation would bring for himself and their families.55 These marital issues continued for the remainder of their lives, with Chamberlain confused on how or why his wife remained so disappointed in their union. They came to a mutual agreement, that they would remain married to preserve public respect for themselves and their family while living separately 51 Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 334. 52 Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 334; Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 59. 53 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Smith, Fanny and Joshua, 195. 54 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Smith, Fanny and Joshua, 195. 55 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 341. 14 for much of the remainder of their lives.56 These public statements were used as fodder by his enemies but amounted to make little difference as Chamberlain was subsequently reelected. Despite this, it is important to understand these accusations to therefore appreciate Chamberlain holistically, and acknowledge their absence in popular history. During the war, Joshua's brother Tom fought alongside Chamberlain in the 20th Maine while the remaining Chamberlains awaited the return of their soldiers. Sarah, their sister, continued life at home while John, being chronically ill, served alongside his brothers as a Chaplain. Upon returning home, John became increasingly sick. Despite the ailments of his brother, Chamberlain ran and was elected for governor whilst his wife spent considerable time caring for John.57 Tom, meanwhile, was lost after his wartime service. He lived and worked in New York for a time, yet never found anything worthwhile. Soon thereafter, John died and Governor Chamberlain left his Tom to fend for himself, stranding him both financially and emotionally as Tom had come to rely on the hospitality of John in Chamberlain's absence.58 Later in life he did the same, as Tom returned to Maine in 1889 after failed pursuits in Florida. Chamberlain, now retired, refused to help him as he had his own financial problems. Tom, neglected to attend any reunions of the 20th Maine, therefore allowing his brother to obtain the spotlight.59 Upon Tom's death, Chamberlain retained the same mindset regarding his siblings. Despite this, Tom never resented his brother, in fact encouraging and supporting him until the day of his death.60 Joshua Chamberlain made himself a priority throughout his life, doing so by routinely disregarding the needs of his loved ones in exchange for his own. This is 56 Perry, Conceived in Liberty, 339. 57 Loski, Chamberlains of Brewer, 78. 58 Loski, Chamberlains of Brewer, 82. 59 Loski, Chamberlains of Brewer, 86. 60 Loski, Chamberlains of Brewer, 88. 15 another unknown aspect of Chamberlain's life, and something that he and popular historians do not want the public to see, as it would taint his image as a saintly officer and leader. Omitted from almost every contemporary textbook or lesson regarding Joshua Chamberlain is the 1880 Maine Gubernatorial crisis, termed the 'Count-Out Crisis'. Essentially, elected Democrat Governor Alonzo Garcelon sought reelection in 1879 against two opponents, Daniel F. Davis of the Republican Party and Joseph L. Smith of the Greenbacks Party. With the vote split between three candidates, 49.6% of the votes went to Davis with the remainder split between Garcelon and Smith. The Maine Constitution declared that without over 50% of the votes, no winner could be announced, and the legislature must elect the governor.61 Facing a Republican majority in the legislature, Garcelon manipulated the votes by casting aside Republican votes as invalid, causing the Supreme Court of Maine to declare his actions unconstitutional and award the governorship to Davis. Garcelon refused to yield his office and began appointing Democrat and Greenback Representatives and Senators while declaring himself the rightful governor. All sides began to mobilize paramilitary forces, forcing then Commander of the Maine Militia, Joshua Chamberlain, to intervene.62 Called upon by leaders of the elected legislature, Chamberlain swiftly took control of the government by using civilian police to oust Garcelon's staff and council before alterations could be made to the legitimate election results.63 Controlling the state as a military dictator, Chamberlain now faced the daunting task of relinquishing power to one of the three factions, retaining it for himself, or allowing the courts to decide. He was urged from all sides, with many pleading him to retain the democratic institutions in place.64 Chamberlain confides his great 61 Desjardin, Life in Letters, 239; Foley, Ballot Battles, 164. 62 Foley, Ballot Battles, 165-167. 63 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 356. 64 Desjardin, Life in Letters, 242. 16 responsibility in Fannie saying "'There is… No Governor, no legislature… I have been obliged to assume the defense… of the state… I am determined that Maine shall not become a Southern American State'".65 He is interpreted as referencing his Confederate counterparts and the lawlessness he associated with their secession and subsequent reintegration into the Union, as well as nations literally situated on the South American continent that were notable monarchies and dictatorships. Chamberlain's outlook on his role in this matter is that of a noble hero, something that surely inflated his ego as well as gave him a needed break from what he deemed to be a morbidly boring life as a civilian. Committed to solving the issue in a non-partisan and equitable manner, Chamberlain managed to enrage almost everyone in Augusta during his occupation. He was offered appointments as senator by each side, to which he adamantly refused stating it was the sole responsibility of the courts to decide the outcome.66 He was discouraged that his own party had amounted military forces and bribed him, and that they and the Democratic camp called him a traitor and usurper who abused his office as Commander of the Militia by intervening.67 Both sides plotted against him, threatened to kill or kidnap him, yet he stayed true to his goal of "'keep[ing] the peace'" and allowing laws to be executed rightfully.68 A local paper describes the scene as dire, where all of the power of the state was vested into Chamberlain until matters could be resolved.69 It was also cautionary, asking citizens to stay calm and avoid the capital, as infantry from Gardiner had been given authority to fire upon civilians or police should they act malicious.70 In the end, he gracefully guided Maine through twelve days of political and social 65 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Goulka, Grand Old Maine of Maine, 138. 66 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 357. 67 Trulock, Hands of Providence, 357. 68 Joshua Chamberlain, as quoted in Trulock, Hands of Providence, 359. 69 "Chamberlain Holds the Helm," Daily Kennebec Journal. 70 "Chamberlain Holds the Helm," Daily Kennebec Journal. 17 unrest, ultimately allowing the court to empower the duly elected legislature to establish Davis as Governor. While Chamberlain fought to maintain his public image though marital and political disputes, today's scholars have begun to delve into his life and analyze his actions. Military writers, for example, annotate analysis his military exploits without necessarily focusing on other aspects of his life. By extension, these writers represent the popular memory of Chamberlain today. Military doctrine displays Chamberlain as the best and brightest military leader of the Civil War, yet writers like Hillyard, Cuddy, and Foley discuss his leadership style progression and whether he deserves the high pedestal he is placed in. Fred Hillyard points out in his paper that the Army uses Joshua Chamberlain as an example of leadership to be emulated, saying that the Army claims responsibility in developing leaders in his image through their education pipelines.71 Hillyard, in the 1980's, questions whether or not this selection is plausible, stating that the notion of military education is lost using Chamberlain as an example as he was schooled at a liberal arts college and volunteered for his commission without any prior military education.72 Hillyard also asserts that although the individual actions of Little Round Top are admirable, the tactics and leadership of the Civil War cannot be adequately translated to modern conflicts. He argues that "students may not relate to the muskets, bayonets, [and] bugle calls… when their thoughts are normally of sophisticated weapons systems… [and] the modern battlefield".73 Moreover, Hillyard continues to question the Army's position regarding Chamberlain, asking if his actions, although notable, were necessarily different from military actions of his time. 71 Hillyard, "Force Multiplier", 3. 72 Hillyard, "Force Multiplier", 3. 73 Hillyard, "Force Multiplier", 6. 18 Hillyard equates Chamberlain's war heroics to his personality, luck, and the fact that the pressure of the situation helped shape him into a military genius. Chamberlain's temperament and personal awareness were key to his success at Gettysburg, in that he was able to learn and adapt to the given situation.74 Hillyard also contributes Chamberlain's willingness to share in the suffering of his men as a motivator for them to follow his lead in battle.75 Unequivocally agreeing that his actions were great, he remains unconvinced that Chamberlain was a special instance of leadership. He determines that when people of character are placed in precarious situations, they usually will make consequential decisions.76 He concludes that Chamberlain is a great example of leadership, one that people can look to and learn from, but is not convinced he is the best example that the military should look toward. This exemplifies that, even in the 1980's, scholars viewpoints of him were changing as a holistic image of Chamberlain and his leadership attributes were being developed. In his paper, John Cuddy focuses on Chamberlain's leadership development over time, and how he became a symbol of leadership for the military and the public. Interestingly, Cuddy contradicts Hillyard by saying that his actions during battle were not a result of him being an exemplary human being, instead attributing his bravery to his personality, personal interactions with different role models, as well as his education and professorship at Bowdoin.77 These characteristics, Cuddy argues, projected him to success in leadership roles, and the evaluation of them and him can help others in the future. He also asserts that Chamberlain had an inert sense of entitlement for esteem and prestige citing his pleas to Senator Morrill regarding his permanent appointment to Major General following the war.78 Despite his ego, he was outwardly concerned 74 Hillyard, "Force Multiplier", 6. 75 Hillyard, "Force Multiplier", 8. 76 Hillyard, "Force Multiplier", 5. 77 Cuddy, "Blood and Fire", 4-5. 78 Cuddy, "Blood and Fire", 6. 19 for the welfare of his troops, yet also garnered the need for respect and order within his unit. He was sympathetic to his men but was also strict when called to do so. Cuddy attributes these and other personality traits to his success militarily and asks future students to analyze his self-need for adventure and validation as an example of poor leadership. Chamberlain's combination of humbleness regarding his troops and desire to prove himself made him daring yet conscious enough to lead gracefully in times of stress. Cuddy also determines that Chamberlain is an example of what good role models can do for leadership development, citing his boyhood idols as well as military leaders. Cuddy establishes that Chamberlain's upbringing was filled with military heroes, like his father and grandfather, of whom he always wanted to emulate.79 His childhood was filled with menial labor, hard lessons, and eventual academic prowess. Chamberlain was an advocate for hard work before the war and took these ideals with him into service. Never receiving formal military training, he yearned to prove himself in battle saying "'Soldiering in a time of peace is almost as much against my grain as being a peace man in time of war'" when asked prior to the war about militia service.80 His upbringing shaped his character, which Cuddy argues helped shape him into an effective military leader. Interestingly, we see Foley stray from the commonality of the other military writers, as he seems to agree with popular historians that Chamberlain was a "honorable" and "inspiring" man who answered his nation's call when needed.81 Foley neglects to mention his development as a leader, instead citing sources that clearly picture him as a leader born for greatness. He cites a plethora of Chamberlain's victories, both on and off the field of battle. These include early 79 Cuddy, "Blood and Fire", 15. 80 Chamberlain, as quoted in Cuddy, "Blood and Fire", 7. 81 Foley, "Citizen Warrior", 8. 20 military accomplishments, as well as earning the trust of his men.82 Foley concludes that Chamberlain was simply a military anomaly, crediting in part his successes to "'good genes'".83 He states that Chamberlain's intellectual prowess and desire for challenge fueled his military success, completely disregarding his development as a leader and person throughout his life.84 His lackluster analysis of Chamberlain's life and development is a discredit to leadership development of future military officers, as his paper clearly misinforms the reader by asserting that Chamberlain was a special instance of innate leadership capability. Chamberlain's preeminence is further celebrated today through monuments erected in his name and image. Intriguingly, these monuments were placed far after the Colonel's death in 1914. The first monument was raised on Veteran's Day, 1997, in Brewer near the Chamberlain home. 85 This monument is placed in a public park that is itself a replica of Little Round Top as well as an homage to the Underground Railroad. Named after Chamberlain, it serves to commemorate his battlefield heroics and those of the Hollyoke House that was an actual part of the railroad.86 It is interesting, noting Chamberlain's unfavorable opinions on voting rights for freedmen, that a memorial to him and his unit are placed at an extremely interesting and important historical site in terms of the Underground Railroad, of which Chamberlain was not involved. Yet, the contributions of the Holyoke Family are overshadowed by Joshua Chamberlain's legacy. It's date of completion, as well as location, are significant 82 Foley, "Citizen Warrior", 16. 83 Foley, "Citizen Warrior", 30. 84 Foley, "Citizen Warrior", 29. 85 Maine Civil War Monuments, "Brewer," https://www.maine.gov/civilwar/monuments/brewerchamberlainpark.html [accessed 3 November 2021]. 86 Maine Civil War Monuments, "Brewer," https://www.maine.gov/civilwar/monuments/brewerchamberlainpark.html [accessed 3 November 2021]. Chamberlain Park Statue, Brewer, Maine 21 Chamberlain Statue, Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine Maine National Guard Headquarters, Augusta, Maine Chamberlain Post Office, Chamberlain, Maine because it shows that his popularity continued to grow despite his actions having taken place more than 130 years before the monument was placed. The revival of Chamberlain and his exploits in the 1990's can also be explained by he and his unit's stardom in later media. Additionally, Chamberlain retains a second monument in Brunswick on the campus of Bowdoin College. Dedicated in 2003, it is not surprising that the college wanted to commemorate its most notable alumni.87 Yet, this is significant given that the school and its faculty denied his initial requests to serve and slandered him to retain him as a professor. Again, it is notable that almost one hundred years after his death, Bowdoin utilizes the popularity and prestige of Chamberlain's name and likeness to honor him on their campus. Both monuments indicate that Chamberlain's popular memory is alive and thriving in Maine and will be for the foreseeable future. They also indicate that his remembrance has grown in recent years, as these monuments were dedicated in the last twenty-five years. In addition to monuments, his memory lives through his posthumous appointment as the namesake of the Maine National Guard Headquarters in Augusta, dedicated in 2018, as well as an eponymous village in my hometown established sometime in the late 19th century. His legacy is an integral part of Maine's military and political lineage as identified through his idolization by local and state organizations. 87 Maine Civil War Monuments, "Brunswick," https://www.maine.gov/civilwar/monuments/brunswickchamberlain.html [accessed 3 November 2021]. 22 It would be absurd to diminish Joshua Chamberlain's importance to the Civil War and the Battle of Gettysburg. His decisive military actions and the courage of his unit earn him the distinction as a great officer in the history of our military. The memory displayed by both the northern and southern soldiery indicates just this and exemplifies his gentlemanly traits that are often noted by popular historians and the public. Yet, these examples do not demonstrate the holistic view of who Chamberlain was during his time on earth, both during and after his service in the war. While he was respected for his gallantry in battle by almost all, historians have regularly neglected or diminished his shortcomings in life. Understanding the totality of historically significant people's life is important because we cannot afford to remember people in a single-faceted sense. When looking back on the past, the public deserve to know the good and the bad about the people they are supposed to admire. A one-dimensional viewpoint on any figure has no benefit except to paint a false reality, one that hides reality in exchange for a rose-colored fallacy. Instead, we should be yearning to investigate the lives of our heroes to learn from both their mistakes and accomplishments. In essence, there is more to learn from the mistakes of others than from their successes. Joshua Chamberlain has rightfully been admired for his heroics in battle, yet his private life seemed secluded, isolated, and rarely discussed. Yet, as of late, writers have begun to acknowledge that the hero of Little Round Top was indeed human, with his own demons that menaced him throughout his life. Accusations of abuse, familial abandonment, and general neglect of those he loved has begun to threaten Chamberlain's legacy. Given these flaws and misdeeds being exhumed, will his reputation, for which he fought vehemently to maintain, be tainted or amended in the coming years? Will the lessons taught in Maine schools feature his military feats, as well as his personal shortcomings? This is a question for historians, both 23 professional and amateur, to answer. We hold the keys to truth through research and analysis, and despite the man's noted contributions to our nation, we also owe a debt to future generations to lay out the entirety of Chamberlain's story, and let our children decide the fate of Maine's famed Colonel. 24 Annotated Bibliography Cunningham, S.A. "About a Distinguished Southern Family," Confederate Veteran, 1900. This edition of the Confederate Veteran discusses an encounter between a former Confederate and Gen. Chamberlain years after the war, discussing what happened on the Gettysburg battlefield. The disagreement the two had regarding it, as well as the adjectives used to describe Chamberlain, are interesting and are noted in the paper. "Chamberlain holds the Helm," Daily Kennebec Journal, January 12, 1880. This news article discusses the Maine gubernatorial crisis in 1880 from their point of view. The article talks about Chamberlain being essentially inserted as a military governor, and the fear in the community regarding this. It is used to support research done in other sources. Chamberlain, Joshua. The Passing of the Armies: An Account of the Final Campaign of the Army of the Potomac, Based Upon Personal Reminiscences of the Fifth Army Corps. Lincoln and London, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1998. Chamberlain's own autobiography is interesting because it was written out of necessity for money. It describes his own experiences of the war and why he believed certain instances occur. This is fascinating because others have differing accounts than he. I did not cite it in the paper, but it is listed in the bibliography. Cuddy, John F. "Training Through Blood and Fire: The Leadership Development of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain." Air Command and Staff College (2015): 2-37. Major Cuddy's essay focuses on Chamberlain's progression as a military leader throughout the war. He states that by modern standards he was a great strategist and soldier yet did not learn at an academy or college. Cuddy advocates for the experiential learning that affected Chamberlain, which he says made him into a great officer. It is used as support for the changing of thought regarding Chamberlain as of late. Desjardin, Thomas A, ed. Joshua L. Chamberlain: A life in Letters: The Previously unpublished letters of a great leader of the Civil War. Harrisburg, PA: National Civil War Museum, 2012. This collection of letters from Chamberlain depicts his personal feeling throughout the war, his gubernatorial years, when he was President of Bowdoin, and throughout his life with his family and colleagues. These primary sources were used when discussing his marital issues, as well as personal feelings during his post-war life. 25 Desjardin, Thomas A. Stand Firm Ye Boys from Maine: The 20th Maine and the Gettysburg Campaign. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1995. Desjardin's work focuses exclusively on the Battle of Gettysburg and the actions taken on Little Round Top by the 20th Maine. Most of this book regards the tactics of the battle, but throughout there are personal quotes from soldiers that will be useful, as well as the final two chapters that deal with the immediate memory of the 'Count-on Crisis' and how that affected the remainder of his life. I did not cite this in the paper, but did research it. Foley, Edward B. Ballot Battles; The History of Disputed Elections in the United States. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press, 2016. This book has a chapter devoted to the Maine gubernatorial crisis, which was very hard to find research on. I used this source to provide context on the event and why it occurred, while highlighting the importance of Chamberlain's resulting actions. Foley, Chris M. "Citizen Warrior; Major General Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain; A Study in Command." USMC Command and Staff College (2012): 8-32. Foley offers a Marine Corps investigation into Chamberlain, who he was as a person, and his leadership characteristics. Like the other officers' papers on Chamberlain, he agrees that the man was a military genius but tends to agree with Trulock and Pullen that Chamberlain's knowledge was an anomaly. Goulka, Jeremiah E, ed. The Grand Old Man of Maine: Selected Letters of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain 1865-1914. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 2004. Goulka's collection of letters fits well with the subject of memory because these letters go from during the war until his death. They discuss in depth his time as governor and the issues regarding his family. They are used to support the secondary source work regarding his life and the events that occurred during it. "Herbert Head of Peace Memorial" Confederate Veteran, 1913. The source is another Confederate viewpoint on the Colonel of the 20th Maine. This, like many, portrays him in a positive light. It is regarding a monument displaying peace between belligerents in Chattanooga, Tennessee. This primary source shows an example of how Confederates and Federal troops viewed him during his life. Hillyard, Fred. "Leadership as a Force Multiplier: The Joshua L. Chamberlain Example." US Army War College (1983): 1-29. This essay is written by an Army officer at the War College. LTC Hillyard discusses Colonel Chamberlain's leadership attributes and if he deserves the high stature he has and still is placed in within the Army. He focuses on how Chamberlain was not a trained soldier, but instead an avid learner who used his ability to absorb knowledge from other professional soldiers. Cuddy's piece on the same subject will support this, and Hillyard's 26 article will be used to further demonstrate Chamberlain's reverence amongst the modern military and changing ideals today. "Indignation in Maine" New York Tribune, December 20, 1879. The New York Tribune article discusses again the situation in 1880 in Maine, but from the outside viewpoint of New Yorkers. It is more of how outsiders view the situation instead of Mainers. "Letter from the State Capital" The Portland Daily Press, August 9, 1862. In my research, this is the first instance I could find discussing then Lt Col Chamberlain and his appointment to the newly designated 20th Maine. It states who the officers and NCOs will be within the unit. It describes Chamberlain in a good light, before he was even in combat, which is important to the research. Maine Civil War Monuments "Brewer." https://www.maine.gov/civilwar/monuments/brewerchamberlainpark.html [accessed 3 November 2021]. This is the State of Maine website that documents all the monuments within the state. It gives the relevant information regarding when the monument was placed and by whom. I also will include personal photographs of the site in the final Draft. Maine Civil War Monuments. "Brunswick." https://www.maine.gov/civilwar/monuments/brunswickchamberlain.html [accessed 3 November 2021]. This is like the prior source, simply a different monument. They serve the same purpose and this one will have a personal photograph as well. Nespitt, Mark, ed. Through Blood & Fire: Selected Civil War Papers of Major General Joshua Chamberlain. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1996. This source will add to primary source collection off Chamberlain through letters but only includes works from 1862-1865. They will be used to express his personal feelings during the war regarding his service, his family, and hopefully any issues within his organization. It is used as supporting documents regarding how he was viewed in his time versus how he is remembered. New York State Military Museum and Veterans Research Center. "140th New York Infantry Regiment's Monument at Gettysburg." https://museum.dmna.ny.gov/unit-history/infantry-2/140th-infantry-regiment/monument-gettysburg [accessed 1 November 2021.] The site depicts the 140th New York Infantry's monument at Gettysburg, which is a statement itself about the men who fought with the unit. It stands as a simple memorial to those who died, including the regimental commander. 27 New York State Military Museum and Veterans Research Center. "44th New York Infantry Regiment's Monument." https://museum.dmna.ny.gov/unit-history/infantry/44th-infantry-regiment/monument-gettysburg [accessed 1 November 2021.] This huge castle is dedicated to the fighting men of the 44th New York, who were also alongside the 20th Maine at Little Round Top. It is a superfluous monument, given the fact their role in the battle was overlooked by the heroics of Chamberlain and his men. It has a lengthy inscription, unlike the 44th's, which describes what they did during the battle and how many perished. Both these sources will be used to show that some friendly soldiers harbored at least a little bit of jealousy and resentment for Chamberlain's popularity and recognition when they received little to none. Longacre, Edward G. Joshua Chamberlain: The Soldier and The Man. Conshohocken, PA: Combined Publishing, 1999. This book was one of the more helpful sources. It goes into who Chamberlain was as both a soldier and normal person, which my paper discovers through memory. This source helped me express to the reader who Chamberlain really was and how that relates to his popular portrayal. Also, it is one of the only sources that really questions Chamberlain and asks tough questions of his character and actions. Loski, Diana H. The Chamberlains of Brewer. Gettysburg, PA: Thomas Publications, 1998. Loski's book primarily confers how the entire Chamberlain family came to be, and their relevance throughout history. It not only discusses Joshua and Fanny, but also his brother Tom, his sister, other extended family, and of course his parents. I use it to discuss his familial life, mainly regarding how he abandoned them routinely. Norton, Oliver W. The Attack and Defense of Little Round Top, Gettysburg, July 2, 1863. New York, NY: The Neale Publishing Company, 1913. Norton's piece, while older, gives a lot of valuable insight into the battle itself. While this is important to compare thinking from the past to present, there are other sources that do a better job. I do not cite it in the paper Perry, Mark. Conceived in Liberty: Joshua Chamberlain, William Oates, and the American Civil War. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, UK: Penguin Books Limited, 1997. This is one of the more credible sources regarding Chamberlain and his memory, as it also discusses his adversary on Little Round Top and their parallels. Through this source, we can see how other officers and officials of the time viewed Chamberlain both during and after the war, and more importantly how his foes viewed him. Also, the book discusses some of his actions after the war, how it affected his personal life, and how others perceived him. This is a good source to use to refer to both how people thought about him but also the reality of his actions. Also, it is a beneficial source to see how adversaries thought of him, specifically William Oates who commanded the regiment that opposed him at Little Round Top. 28 Pullen, John J. The Twentieth Maine: A Volunteer Regiment in the Civil War. Philadelphia, PA: J.B Lippincott & Company, 1957. The book provides instances of how he is/was remembered. Mainly this source quotes Oates, Chamberlain's counterpart, but also Chamberlain's soldiers regarding their leader. Because the point of this paper is to focus on memory, this source will be helpful because it has a lot of points regarding how the people he commanded felt about Chamberlain. Smith, Diane Munroe, ed. Fanny and Joshua: The Enigmatic Lives of Frances Caroline Adams and Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. Gettysburg, PA: Thomas Publications, 1999. Like the Chamberlains of Brewer source, this book will give greater understanding of the relationship of Chamberlain and his wife. Comparing to other sources, I will see if in fact their relationship was strained and if so why. It is mainly letters between the two, accompanied by brief excerpts describing the times and circumstances of the letters. These sources will help determine if his stately appearance was a public rouse or if he was privately a different man. Trulock, Alice Rains. In the Hands of Providence: Joshua L. Chamberlain and the American Civil War. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1992. Trulock's work is one of the prolific biographies of Joshua Chamberlain but is claimed by writers like Cuddy and Longacre to be one sided and only include the more cheerful instances in his life. Most of the work puts Chamberlain in a good light by designating him as a marvelous leader who was fair and beloved by his troops. Strangely, she does mention some of his more unsavory actions after the war, as well as explaining his resistance in allowing freedmen to vote. I use this source a multitude of times because the author covers almost every instance of Chamberlain's life. United States Department of Defense. "Medal of Honor Monday." https://www.defense.gov/News/Feature-Stories/story/Article/2086560/medal-of-honor-monday-army-maj-gen-joshua-chamberlain/ [accessed 3 November 2021]. This DoD article discusses Chamberlain as an astute, gentlemanly officer who was a gallant recipient of the Medal of Honor. While this is true, it again is an example of popular memory regarding Chamberlain. He is viewed only through his singular actions, not by a collection of them. Weart, David. The Military Leader. "Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain- Leadership in Action," https://themilitaryleader.com/leadership-action-chamberlain/ [accessed 3 November 2021]. Weart's online article does the same as the DoD's. It describes Chamberlain in a single faceted manner and neglects all the instances that made him human like everyone else.

Daniel Deudney on Mixed Ontology, Planetary Geopolitics, and Republican Greenpeace



This is the second in a series of Talks dedicated to the technopolitics of International Relations, linked to the forthcoming double volume 'The Global Politics of Science and Technology' edited by Maximilian Mayer, Mariana Carpes, and Ruth Knoblich 






World politics increasingly abrasions with the limits of state-centric thinking, faced as the world is with a set of issues that affect not only us collectively as mankind, but also the planet itself. While much of IR theorizing seems to shirk such realizations, the work of Daniel Deudney has consistently engaged with the complex problems engendered by the entanglements of nuclear weapons, the planetary environment, space exploration, and the kind of political associations that might help us to grapple with our fragile condition as humanity-in-the world. In this elaborate Talk, Deudney—amongst others—lays out his understanding of the fundamental forces that drive both planetary political progress and problems; discusses the kind of ontological position needed to appreciate these problems; and argues for the merits of a republican greenpeace model to political organization.





Print version of this Talk (pdf)







What is, according to you, the biggest challenge / principal debate in current IR? What is your position or answer to this challenge / in this debate?



The study of politics is the study of human politics and the human situation has been—and is being—radically altered by changes in the human relationships with the natural and material worlds. In my view, this means IR and related intellectual disciplines should focus on better understanding the emergence of the 'global' and the 'planetary,' their implications for the overall human world and its innumerable sub-worlds, and their relations with the realization of basic human needs. The global and the planetary certainly don't comprise all of the human situation, but the fact that the human situation has become global and planetary touches every other facet of the human situation, sometimes in fundamental ways. The simple story is that the human world is now 'global and planetary' due to the explosive transformation over the last several centuries of science-based technology occurring within the geophysical and biophysical features of planet Earth. The natural Earth and its relationship with humans have been massively altered by the vast amplifications in dispersed human agency produced by the emergence and spread of machine-based civilization. The overall result of these changes has been the emergence of a global- and planetary-scale material and social reality that is in some ways similar, but in other important ways radically different, from earlier times. Practices and structures inherited from the pre-global human worlds have not adequately been adjusted to take the new human planetary situation into account and their persistence casts a long and partially dark shadow over the human prospect.



A global and planetary focus is also justified—urgently—by the fact that the overall human prospect on this planet, and the fate of much additional life on this planet, is increasingly dependent on the development and employment of new social arrangements for interacting with these novel configurations of material and natural possibilities and limits. Human agency is now situated, and is making vastly fateful choices—for better or worse—in a sprawling, vastly complex aggregation of human-machine-nature assemblies which is our world. The 'fate of the earth' now partly hinges on human choices, and helping to make sure these choices are appropriate ones should be the paramount objective of political scientific and theoretical efforts. However, no one discipline or approach is sufficient to grapple successfully with this topic. All disciplines are necessary. But there are good reasons to believe that 'IR' and related disciplines have a particularly important possible practical role to play. (I am also among those who prefer 'global studies' as a label for the enterprise of answering questions that cut across and significantly subsume both the 'international' and the 'domestic.')



My approach to grappling with this topic is situated—like the work of now vast numbers of other IR theorists and researchers of many disciplines—in the study of 'globalization.' The now widely held starting point for this intellectual effort is the realization that globalization has been the dominant pattern or phenomenon, the story of stories, over at least the last five centuries. Globalization has been occurring in military, ecological, cultural, and economic affairs. And I emphasize—like many, but not all, analysts of globalization—that the processes of globalization are essentially dependent on new machines, apparatuses, and technologies which humans have fabricated and deployed. Our world is global because of the astounding capabilities of machine civilization. This startling transformation of human choice by technological advance is centrally about politics because it is centrally about changes in power. Part of this power story has been about changes in the scope and forms of domination. Globalization has been, to state the point mildly, 'uneven,' marked by amplifications of violence and domination and predation on larger and wider scales. Another part of the story of the power transformation has been the creation of a world marked by high degrees of interdependence, interaction, speed, and complexity. These processes of globalization and the transformation of machine capabilities are not stopping or slowing down but are accelerating. Thus, I argue that 'bounding power'—the growth, at times by breathtaking leaps, of human capabilities to do things—is now a fundamental feature of the human world, and understanding its implications should, in my view, be a central activity for IR scholars.



In addressing the topic of machine civilization and its globalization on Earth, my thinking has been centered first around the developing of 'geopolitical' lines argument to construct a theory of 'planetary geopolitics'. 'Geopolitics' is the study of geography, ecology, technology, and the earth, and space and place, and their interaction with politics. The starting point for geopolitical analysis is accurate mapping. Not too many IR scholars think of themselves as doing 'geography' in any form. In part this results from of the unfortunate segregation of 'geography' into a separate academic discipline, very little of which is concerned with politics. Many also mistake the overall project of 'geopolitics' with the ideas, and egregious mistakes and political limitations, of many self-described 'geopoliticans' who are typically arch-realists, strong nationalists, and imperialists. Everyone pays general lip service to the importance of technology, but little interaction occurs between IR and 'technology studies' and most IR scholars are happy to treat such matters as 'technical' or non-political in character. Despite this general theoretical neglect, many geographic and technological factors routinely pop into arguments in political science and political theory, and play important roles in them.



Thinking about the global and planetary through the lens of a fuller geopolitics is appealing to me because it is the human relationship with the material world and the Earth that has been changed with the human world's globalization. Furthermore, much of the actual agendas of movements for peace, arms control, and sustainability are essentially about alternative ways of ordering the material world and our relations with it. Given this, I find an approach that thinks systematically about the relations between patterns of materiality and different political forms is particularly well-suited to provide insights of practical value for these efforts.



The other key focus of my research has been around extending a variety of broadly 'republican' political insights for a cluster of contemporary practical projects for peace, arms control, and environmental stewardship ('greenpeace'). Even more than 'geopolitics,' 'republicanism' is a term with too many associations and meanings. By republics I mean political associations based on popular sovereignty and marked by mutual limitations, that is, by 'bounding power'—the restraint of power, particularly violent power—in the interests of the people generally. Assuming that security from the application of violence to bodies is a primary (but not sole) task of political association, how do republican political arrangements achieve this end? I argue that the character and scope of power restraint arrangements that actually serve the fundamental security interests of its popular sovereign varies in significant ways in different material contexts.



Republicanism is first and foremost a domestic form, centered upon the successive spatial expansion of domestic-like realms, and the pursuit of a constant political project of maximally feasible ordered freedom in changed spatial and material circumstances. I find thinking about our global and planetary human situation from the perspective of republicanism appealing because the human global and planetary situation has traits—most notably high levels of interdependence, interaction, practical speed, and complexity—that make it resemble our historical experience of 'domestic' and 'municipal' realms. Thinking with a geopolitically grounded republicanism offers insights about global governance very different from the insights generated within the political conceptual universe of hierarchical, imperial, and state-centered political forms. Thus planetary geopolitics and republicanism offers a perspective on what it means to 'Think Globally and Act Locally.' If we think of, or rather recognize, the planet as our locality, and then act as if the Earth is our locality, then we are likely to end up doing various approximations of the best-practice republican forms that we have successfully developed in our historically smaller domestic localities.





How did you arrive at where you currently are in IR?



Like anybody else, the formative events in my intellectual development have been shaped by the thick particularities of time and place. 'The boy is the father of the man,' as it is said. The first and most direction-setting stage in the formation of my 'green peace' research interests was when I was in 'grade school,' roughly the years from age 6-13. During these years my family lived in an extraordinary place, St Simons Island, a largely undeveloped barrier island off the coast of southern Georgia. This was an extremely cool place to be a kid. It had extensive beaches, and marshes, as well as amazing trees of gargantuan proportions. My friends and I spent much time exploring, fishing, camping out, climbing trees, and building tree houses. Many of these nature-immersion activities were spontaneous, others were in Boy Scouts. This extraordinary natural environment and the attachments I formed to it, shaped my strong tendency to see the fates of humans and nature as inescapably intertwined. But the Boy Scouts also instilled me with a sense of 'virtue ethics'. A line from the Boy Scout Handbook captures this well: 'Take a walk around your neighborhood. Make a list of what is right and wrong about it. Make a plan to fix what is not right.' This is a demotic version of Weber's political 'ethic of responsibility.' This is very different from the ethics of self-realization and self-expression that have recently gained such ground in America and elsewhere. It is now very 'politically incorrect' to think favorably of the Boy Scouts, but I believe that if the Scouting experience was universally accessible, the world would be a much improved place.



My kid-in-nature life may sound very Tom Sawyer, but it was also very Tom Swift. My friends and I spent much of our waking time reading about the technological future, and imaginatively play-acting in future worlds. This imaginative world was richly fertilized by science fiction comic books, television shows, movies, and books. Me and my friends—juvenile technological futurists and techno-nerds in a decidedly anti-intellectual culture—were avid readers of Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, Ray Bradbury, and Robert Heinlein, and each new issue of Analog was eagerly awaited. While we knew we were Americans, my friends and I had strong inclinations to think of ourselves most essentially as 'earthlings.' We fervently discussed extraterrestrial life and UFOs, and we eagerly awaited the day, soon to occur, we were sure, in which we made 'first contact.' We wanted to become, if not astronauts, then designers and builders of spaceships. We built tree houses, but we filled them with discarded electronics and they became starships. We rode bicycles, but we lugged about attaché cases filled with toy ray guns, transistor radios, firecrackers, and homemade incendiary devices. We built and fired off rockets, painstaking assembled plastic kit models of famous airplanes and ships, and then we would blow them apart with our explosives. The future belonged to technology, and we fancied ourselves its avant garde.



Yet the prospect of nuclear Armageddon seemed very real. We did 'duck and cover' drills at school, and sat for two terrifying weeks through the Cuban Missile Crisis. My friends and I had copies of the Atomic Energy Commission manuals on 'nuclear effects,' complete with a slide-rule like gadget that enabled us to calculate just what would happen if near-by military bases were obliterated by nuclear explosions. Few doubted that we were, in the words of a pop song, 'on the eve of destruction.' These years were also the dawning of 'the space age' in which humans were finally leaving the Earth and starting what promised to be an epic trek, utterly transformative in its effects, to the stars. My father worked for a number of these years for a large aerospace military-industrial firm, then working for NASA to build the very large rockets needed to launch men and machines to the moon and back. My friends and I debated fantastical topics, such as the pros and cons of emigrating to Mars, and how rapidly a crisis-driven exodus from the earth could be organized.



Two events that later occurred in the area where I spent my childhood served as culminating catalytic events for my greenpeace thinking. First, some years after my family moved away, the industrial facility to mix rocket fuel that had been built by the company my father worked for, and that he had helped put into operation, was struck by an extremely violent 'industrial accident,' which reduced, in one titanic flash, multi-story concrete and steel buildings filled with specialized heavy industrial machinery (and everyone in them) into a grey powdery gravel ash, no piece of which was larger than a fist. Second, during the late 1970s, the US Navy acquired a large tract of largely undeveloped marsh and land behind another barrier island (Cumberland), an area 10-15 miles from where I had lived, a place where I had camped, fished, and hunted deer. The Navy dredged and filled what was one of the most biologically fertile temperate zone estuaries on the planet. There they built the east coast base for the new fleet of Trident nuclear ballistic missile submarines, the single most potent violence machine ever built, thus turning what was for me the wildest part of my wild-encircled childhood home into one of the largest nuclear weapons complexes on earth. These events catalyzed for me the realization that there was a great struggle going on, for the Earth and for the future, and I knew firmly which side I was on.



My approach to thinking about problems was also strongly shaped by high school debate, where I learned the importance of 'looking at questions from both sides,' and from this stems my tendency to look at questions as debates between competing answers, and to focus on decisively engaging, defeating, and replacing the strongest and most influential opposing positions. As an undergraduate at Yale College, I started doing Political Theory. I am sure that I was a very vexing student in some ways, because (the debater again) I asked Marxist questions to my liberal and conservative professors, and liberal and conservative ones to my Marxist professors. Late in my sophomore year, I had my epiphany, my direction-defining moment, that my vocation would be an attempt to do the political theory of the global and the technological. Since then, the only decisions have been ones of priority and execution within this project.



Wanting to learn something about cutting-edge global and technological and issues, I next went to Washington D.C. for seven years. I worked on Capitol Hill for three and a half years as a policy aide, working on energy and conservation and renewable energy and nuclear power. I spent the other three and a half years as a Senior Researcher at the Worldwatch Institute, a small environmental and global issues think tank that was founded and headed by Lester Brown, a well-known and far-sighted globalist. I co-authored a book about renewable energy and transitions to global sustainability and wrote a study on space and space weapons. At the time I published Whole Earth Security: a Geopolitics of Peace (1983), in which my basic notions of planetary geopolitics and republicanism were first laid out. During these seven years in Washington, I also was a part-time student, earning a Master's degree in Science, Technology and Public Policy at George Washington University.



In all, these Washington experiences have been extremely valuable for my thinking. Many political scientists view public service as a low or corrupting activity, but this is, I think, very wrong-headed. The reason that the democratic world works as well as it does is because of the distributive social intelligence. But social intelligence is neither as distributed nor as intelligent as it needs to be to deal with many pressing problems. My experience as a Congressional aide taught me that most of the problems that confront my democracy are rooted in various limits and corruptions of the people. I have come to have little patience with those who say, for example, rising inequality is inherent in capital C capitalism, when the more proximate explanation is that the Reagan Republican Party was so successful in gutting the progressive tax system previously in place in the United States. Similarly, I see little value in claims, to take a very contemporary example, that 'the NSA is out of control' when this agency is doing more or less what the elected officials, responding to public pressures to provide 'national security' loudly demanded. In democracies, the people are ultimately responsible.



As I was immersed in the world of arms control and environmental activism I was impressed by the truth of Keynes's oft quoted line, about the great practical influence of the ideas of some long-dead 'academic scribbler.' This is true in varying degrees in every issue area, but in some much more than others. This reinforced my sense that great potential practical consequence of successfully innovating in the various conceptual frameworks that underpinned so many important activities. For nuclear weapons, it became clear to me that the problem was rooted in the statist and realist frames that people so automatically brought to a security question of this magnitude.



Despite the many appeals of a career in DC politics and policy, this was all for me an extended research field-trip, and so I left Washington to do a PhD—a move that mystified many of my NGO and activist friends, and seemed like utter folly to my political friends. At Princeton University, I concentrated on IR, Political Theory, and Military History and Politics, taking courses with Robert Gilpin, Richard Falk, Barry Posen, Sheldon Wolin and others. In my dissertation—entitled Global Orders: Geopolitical and Materialist Theories of the Global-Industrial Era, 1890-1945—I explored IR and related thinking about the impacts of the industrial revolution as a debate between different world order alternatives, and made arguments about the superiority of liberalist, internationalist, and globalist arguments—most notably from H.G. Wells and John Dewey—to the strong realist and imperialist ideas most commonly associated with the geopolitical writers of this period.



I also continued engaging in activist policy affiliated to the Program on Nuclear Policy Alternatives at the Center for Energy andEnvironmental Studies (CEES), which was then headed by Frank von Hippel, a physicist turned 'public interest scientist', and a towering figure in the global nuclear arms control movement. I was a Post Doc at CEES during the Gorbachev era and I went on several amazing and eye-opening trips to the Soviet Union. Continuing my space activism, I was able to organize workshops in Moscow and Washington on large-scale space cooperation, gathering together many of the key space players on both sides. While Princeton was fabulously stimulating intellectually, it was also a stressful pressure-cooker, and I maintained my sanity by making short trips, two of three weekends, over six years, to Manhattan, where I spent the days working in the main reading room of the New York Public Library and the nights partying and relaxing in a world completely detached from academic life.



When it comes to my intellectual development in terms of reading theory, the positive project I wanted to pursue was partially defined by approaches I came to reject. Perhaps most centrally, I came to reject an approach that was very intellectually powerful, even intoxicating, and which retains great sway over many, that of metaphysical politics. The politics of the metaphysicians played a central role in my coming to reject the politics of metaphysics. The fact that some metaphysical ideas and the some of the deep thinkers who advanced them, such as Heidegger, and many Marxists, were so intimately connected with really disastrous politics seemed a really damning fact for me, particularly given that these thinkers insisted so strongly on the link between their metaphysics and their politics. I was initially drawn to Nietzsche's writing (what twenty-year old isn't) but his model of the philosopher founder or law-giver—that is, of a spiritually gifted but alienated guy (and it always is a guy) with a particularly strong but frustrated 'will to power' going into the wilderness, having a deep spiritual revelation, and then returning to the mundane corrupt world with new 'tablets of value,' along with a plan to take over and run things right—seemed more comic than politically relevant, unless the prophet is armed, in which case it becomes a frightful menace. The concluding scene in Herman Hesse's Magister Ludi (sometimes translated as The Glass Bead Game) summarized by overall view of the 'high theory' project. After years of intense training by the greatest teachers the most spiritually and intellectually gifted youths finally graduate. To celebrate, they go to lake, dive in, and, having not learned how to swim, drown.



I was more attracted to Aristotle, Hume, Montesquieu, Dewey and other political theorists with less lofty and comprehensive views of what theory might accomplish; weary of actions; based on dogmatic or totalistic thinking; an eye to the messy and compromised world; with a political commitment to liberty and the interests of the many; a preference for peace over war; an aversion to despotism and empire; and an affinity for tolerance and plurality. I also liked some of those thinkers because of their emphasis on material contexts. Montesquieu seeks to analyze the interaction of material contexts and republican political forms; Madison and his contemporaries attempt to extend the spatial scope of republican political association by recombining in novel ways various earlier power restraint arrangements. I was tremendously influenced by Dewey, studying intensively his slender volume The Public and its Problems (1927)—which I think is the most important book in twentieth century political thought. By the 'public' Dewey means essentially a stakeholder group, and his main point is that the material transformations produced by the industrial revolution has created new publics, and that the political task is to conceptualize and realize forms of community and government appropriate to solving the problems that confront these new publics.



One can say my overall project became to apply and extend their concepts to the contemporary planetary situation. Concomitantly reading IR literature on nuclear weapons, I was struck by fact that the central role that material realities played in these arguments was very ad hoc, and that many of the leading arguments on nuclear politics were very unconvincing. It was clear that while Waltz (Theory Talk #40) had brilliantly developed some key ideas about anarchy made by Hobbes and Rousseau, he had also left something really important out. These sorts of deficiencies led me to develop the arguments contained in Bounding Power. I think it is highly unlikely that I would have had these doubts, or come to make the arguments I made without having worked in political theory and in policy.



I read many works that greatly influenced my thinking in this area, among them works by Lewis Mumford, Langdon Winner's Autonomous Technology, James Lovelock's Gaia, Charles Perrow's Normal Accidents (read a related article here, pdf), Jonathan Schell's Fate of the Earth and The Abolition, William Ophul's Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity... I was particularly stuck by a line in Buckminster Fuller's Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth (pdf), that we live in a 'spaceship' like closed highly interconnected system, but lack an 'operating manual' to guide intelligently our actions. It was also during this period that I read key works by H.G. Wells, most notably his book, Anticipations, and his essay The Idea of a League of Nations, both of which greatly influenced my thinking.



This aside, the greatest contribution to my thinking has come from conversations sustained over many years with some really extraordinary individuals. To mention those that I have been arguing with, and learning from, for at least ten years, there is John O'Looney, Wesley Warren, Bob Gooding-Williams, Alyn McAuly, Henry Nau, Richard Falk, Michael Doyle (Theory Talk #1), Richard Mathew, Paul Wapner, Bron Taylor, Ron Deibert, John Ikenberry, Bill Wohlforth, Frank von Hippel, Ethan Nadelmann, Fritz Kratochwil, Barry Buzan (Theory Talk #35), Ole Waever, John Agnew (Theory Talk #4), Barry Posen, Alex Wendt (Theory Talk #3), James der Derian, David Hendrickson, Nadivah Greenberg, Tim Luke, Campbell Craig, Bill Connolly, Steven David, Jane Bennett, Daniel Levine (TheoryTalk #58), and Jairus Grove. My only regret is that I have not spoken even more with them, and with the much larger number of people I have learned from on a less sustained basis along the way.

                                    



What would a student need to become a specialist in IR or understand the world in a global way?



I have thought a great deal about what sort of answers to this question can be generally valuable. For me, the most important insight is that success in intellectual life and academia is determined by more or less the same combination of factors that determines success more generally. This list is obvious: character, talent, perseverance and hard work, good judgment, good 'people skills,' and luck. Not everyone has a talent to do this kind of work, but the number of people who do have the talent to do this kind of work is much larger than the number of people who are successful in doing it. I think in academia as elsewhere, the people most likely to really succeed are those whose attitude toward the activity is vocational. A vocation is something one is called to do by an inner voice that one cannot resist. People with vocations never really work in one sense, because they are doing something that they would be doing even if they were not paid or required. Of course, in another sense people with vocations never stop working, being so consumed with their path that everything else matters very little. People with jobs and professions largely stop working when they when the lottery, but people with vocations are empowered to work more and better. When your vocation overlaps with your job, you should wake up and say 'wow, I cannot believe I am being paid to do this!' Rather obviously, the great danger in the life paths of people with vocations is imbalance and burn-out. To avoid these perils it is beneficial to sustain strong personal relationships, know when and how to 'take off' effectively, and sustain the ability to see things as an unfolding comedy and to laugh.



Academic life also involves living and working in a profession. Compared to the oppressions that so many thinkers and researchers have historically suffered from, contemporary professional academic life is a utopia. But academic life has several aspects unfortunate aspects, and coping successfully with them is vital. Academic life is full of 'odd balls' and the loose structure of universities and organization, combined with the tenure system, licenses an often florid display of dubious behavior. A fair number of academics have really primitive and incompetent social skills. Others are thin skinned-ego maniacs. Some are pompous hypocrites. Some are ruthlessly self-aggrandizing and underhanded. Some are relentless shirkers and free-riders. Also, academic life is, particularly relative to the costs of obtaining the years of education necessary to obtain it, not very well paid. Corruptions of clique, ideological factionalism, and nepotism occur. If not kept in proper perspective, and approached in appropriate ways, academic department life can become stupidly consuming of time, energy, and most dangerously, intellectual attention. The basic step for healthy departmental life is to approach it as a professional role.



The other big dimension of academic life is teaching. Teaching is one of the two 'deliverables' that academic organizations provide in return for the vast resources they consume. Shirking on teaching is a dereliction of responsibility, but also is the foregoing of a great opportunity. Teaching is actually one of the most assuredly consequential things academics do. The key to great teaching is, I think, very simple: inspire and convey enthusiasm. Once inspired, students learn. Once students take questions as their own, they become avid seekers of answers. Teachers of things political also have a responsibility to remain even-handed in what they teach, to make sure that they do not teach just or mainly their views, to make sure that the best and strongest versions of opposing sides are heard. Teaching seeks to produce informed and critically thinking students, not converts. Beyond the key roles of inspiration and even-handedness, the rest is the standard package of tasks relevant in any professional role: good preparation, good organization, hard work, and clarity of presentation.





Your main book, Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village (2007), is a mix of intellectual history, political theory and IR theory, and is targeted largely at realism. How does a reading and interpretation of a large number of old books tell us something new about realism, and the contemporary global?



Bounding Power attempts to dispel some very large claims made by realists about their self-proclaimed 'tradition,' a lineage of thought in which they place many of the leading Western thinkers about political order, such as Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Rousseau, and the 'global geopoliticans' from the years around the beginning of the twentieth century. In the book I argue that the actual main axis of western thinking about political order (and its absence) is largely the work of 'republican' thinkers from the small number of 'republics', and that many of the key ideas that realists call realist and liberals call liberal are actually fragments of a larger, more encompassing set of arguments that were primarily in the idioms of republicanism. This entails dispelling the widely held view that the liberal and proto-liberal republican thought and practice are marked by 'idealism'—and therefore both inferior in their grasp of the problem of security-from violence and valuable only when confined to the 'domestic.' I demonstrate that this line of republican security thinkers had a robust set of claims both about material contextual factors, about the 'geopolitics of freedom', and a fuller understanding of security-from-violence. The book shows how perhaps the most important insights of this earlier cluster of arguments has oddly been dropped by both realists (particularly neorealists) and liberal international theorists. And, finally, it is an attempt to provide an understanding that posits the project of exiting anarchy on a global scale as something essentially unprecedented, and as something that the best of our inherited theory leaves us unable to say much about.



The main argument is contained in my formulation of what I think are the actual the two main sets of issues of Western structural-materialist security theory, two problematiques formulated in republican and naturalist-materialist conceptual vocabularies. The first problematique concerns the relationship between material context, the scope of tolerable anarchy, and necessary-for-security government. The second problematic concerns the relative security-viability of two main different forms of government—hierarchical and republican.



This formulation of the first problematic concerning anarchy differs from the main line of contemporary Realist argument in that it poses the question as one about the spatial scope of tolerable anarchy. The primary variable in my reconstruction of the material-contextual component of these arguments is what I term violence interdependence (absent, weak, strong, and intense). The main substantive claim of Western structural-materialist security theory is that situations of anarchy combined with intense violence interdependence are incompatible with security and require substantive government. Situations of strong and weak violence interdependence constitute a tolerable (if at times 'nasty and brutish') second ('state-of-war') anarchy not requiring substantive government. Early formulations of 'state of nature' arguments, explicitly or implicitly hinge upon this material contextual variable, and the overall narrative structure of the development of republican security theory and practice has concerned natural geographic variations and technologically caused changes in the material context, and thus the scope of security tolerable/intolerable anarchy and needed substantive government. This argument was present in early realist versions of anarchy arguments, but has been dropped by neorealists. Conversely, contemporary liberal international theorists analyze interdependence, but have little to say about violence. The result is that the realists talk about violence and security, and the liberals talk about interdependence not relating to violence, producing the great lacuna of contemporary theory: analysis of violence interdependence.



The second main problematique, concerning the relative security viability of hierarchical and republican forms, has also largely been lost sight of, in large measure by the realist insistence that governments are by definition hierarchical, and the liberal avoidance of system structural theory in favor of process, ideational, and economic variables. (For neoliberals, cooperation is seen as (possibly) occurring in anarchy, without altering or replacing anarchy.) The main claim here is that republican and proto-liberal theorists have a more complete grasp of the security political problem than realists because of their realization that both the extremes of hierarchy and anarchy are incompatible with security. In order to register this lost component of structural theory I refer to republican forms at both the unit and the system-level as being characterized by an ordering principle which I refer to as negarchy. Such political arrangements are characterized by the simultaneous negation of both hierarchy and anarchy. The vocabulary of political structures should thus be conceived as a triad-triangle of anarchy, hierarchy, and negarchy, rather than a spectrum stretching from pure anarchy to pure hierarchy. Using this framework, Bounding Power traces various formulations of the key arguments of security republicans from the Greeks through the nuclear era as arguments about the simultaneous avoidance of hierarchy and anarchy on expanding spatial scales driven by variations and changes in the material context. If we recognize the main axis of our thinking in this way, we can stand on a view of our past that is remarkable in its potential relevance to thinking and dealing with the contemporary 'global village' like a human situation.





Nuclear weapons play a key role in the argument of Bounding Power about the present, as well as elsewhere in your work. But are nuclear weapons are still important as hey were during the Cold War to understand global politics?



Since their arrival on the world scene in the middle years of the twentieth century, there has been pretty much universal agreement that nuclear weapons are in some fundamental way 'revolutionary' in their implications for security-from-violence and world politics. The fact that the Cold War is over does not alter, and even stems from, this fact. Despite this wide agreement on the importance of nuclear weapons, theorists, policy makers, and popular arms control/disarmament movements have fundamental disagreements about which political forms are compatible with the avoidance of nuclear war. I have attempted to provide a somewhat new answer to this 'nuclear-political question', and to explain why strong forms of interstate arms control are necessary for security in the nuclear age. I argue that achieving the necessary levels of arms control entails somehow exiting interstate anarchy—not toward a world government as a world state, but toward a world order that is a type of compound republican union (marked by, to put it in terms of above discussion, a nearly completely negarchical structure).



This argument attempts to close what I term the 'arms control gap', the discrepancy between the value arms control is assigned by academic theorists of nuclear weapons and their importance in the actual provision of security in the nuclear era. During the Cold War, thinking among IR theorists about nuclear weapons tended to fall into three broad schools—war strategists, deterrence statists, and arms controllers. Where the first two only seem to differ about the amount of nuclear weapons necessary for states seeking security (the first think many, the second less), the third advocates that states do what they have very rarely done before the nuclear age, reciprocal restraints on arms.



But this Cold War triad of arguments is significantly incomplete as a list of the important schools of thought about the nuclear-political question. There are four additional schools, and a combination of their arguments constitutes, I argue, a superior answer to the nuclear-political question. First are the nuclear one worlders, a view that flourished during the late 1940s and early 1950s, and held that the simple answer to the nuclear political question is to establish a world government, as some sort of state. Second are the populist anti-nuclearists, who indict state apparatuses of acting contrary to the global public's security interests. Third are the deep arms controllers, such as Jonathan Schell, who argue that nuclear weapons need to be abolished. Fourth are the theorists of omniviolence, who theorize situations produced by the leakage of nuclear weapons into the hands of non-state actors who cannot be readily deterred from using nuclear weapons. What all of these schools have in common is that they open up the state and make arguments about how various forms of political freedom—and the institutions that make it possible—are at issue in answering the nuclear-political question.

                                                                                                                

Yet one key feature all seven schools share is that they all make arguments about how particular combinations and configurations of material realities provide the basis for thinking that their answer to the nuclear-political question is correct. Unfortunately, their understandings of how material factors shape, or should shape, actual political arrangements is very ad hoc. Yet the material factors—starting with sheer physical destructiveness—are so pivotal that they merit a more central role in theories of nuclear power. I think we need to have a model that allows us to grasp how variations in material contexts condition the functionality of 'modes of protection', that is, distinct and recurring security practices (and their attendant political structures).



For instance, one mode of protection—what I term the real-state mode of protection—attempts to achieve security through the concentration, mobilization, and employment of violence capability. This is the overall, universal, context-independent strategy of realists. Bringing into view material factors, I argue, shows that this mode of protection is functional not universally but specifically—and only—in material contexts that are marked by violence-poverty and slowness. This mode of protection is dysfunctional in nuclear material contexts marked by violence abundance and high violence velocities. In contrast, a republican federal mode of protection is a bundle of practices that aim for the demobilization and deceleration of violence capacity, and that the practices associated with this mode of protection are security functional in the nuclear material context.



What emerges from such an approach to ideas about the relation between nuclear power and security from violence is that the epistemological foundations for any of the major positions about nuclear weapons are actually much weaker than we should be comfortable with. People often say the two most important questions about the nuclear age are: what is the probability that nuclear weapons will be used? And then, what will happen when they are used? The sobering truth is that we really do not have good grounds for confidently answering either of those two questions. But every choice made about nuclear weapons depends on risk calculations that depend on how we answer these questions.





You have also written extensively on space, a topic that has not recently attracted much attention from many IR scholars. How does your thinking on this relate to your overall thinking about the global and planetary situation?

                                                                                                          

The first human steps into outer space during the middle years of the twentieth century have been among the most spectacular and potentially consequential events in the globalization of machine civilization on Earth. Over the course of what many call 'the space age,' thinking about space activities, space futures, and the consequences of space activities has been dominated by an elaborately developed body of 'space expansionist' thought that makes ambitious and captivating claims about both the feasibility and the desirability of human expansion into outer space. Such views of space permeate popular culture, and at times appear to be quite influential in actual space policy. Space expansionists hold that outer space is a limitless frontier and that humans should make concerted efforts to explore and colonize and extend their military activities into space. They claim the pursuit of their ambitious projects will have many positive, even transformative, effects upon the human situation on Earth, by escaping global closure, protecting the earth's habitability, preserving political plurality, and enhancing species survival. Claims about the Earth, its historical patterns and its contemporary problems, permeate space expansionist thinking.



While the feasibility, both technological and economic, of space expansionist projects has been extensively assessed, arguments for their desirability have not been accorded anything approaching a systematic assessment. In part, such arguments about the desirability of space expansion are difficult to assess because they incorporate claims that are very diverse in character, including claims about the Earth (past, present, and future), about the ways in which material contexts made up of space 'geography' and technologies produce or heavily favor particular political outcomes, and about basic worldview assumptions regarding nature, science, technology, and life.



By breaking these space expansionist arguments down into their parts, and systematically assessing their plausibility, a very different picture of the space prospect emerges. I think there are strong reasons to think that the consequences of the human pursuit of space expansion have been, and could be, very undesirable, even catastrophic. The actual militarization of that core space technology ('the rocket') and the construction of a planetary-scope 'delivery' and support system for nuclear war-fighting has been the most important consequence of actual space activities, but these developments have been curiously been left out of accounts of the space age and assessments of its impacts. Similarly, much of actually existing 'nuclear arms control' has centered on restraining and dismantling space weapons, not nuclear weapons. Thus the most consequential space activity—the acceleration of nuclear delivery capabilities—has been curiously rendered almost invisible in accounts of space and assessments of its impacts. This is an 'unknown known' of the 'space age'. Looking ahead, the creation of large orbital infrastructures will either presuppose or produce world government, potentially of a very hierarchical sort.  There are also good reasons to think that space colonies are more likely to be micro-totalitarian than free. And extensive human movement off the planet could in a variety of ways increase the vulnerability of life on Earth, and even jeopardize the survival of the human species.



Finally, I think much of space expansionist (and popular) thinking about space and the consequences of humans space activities has been marked by basic errors in practical geography. Most notably, there is the widespread failure to realize that the expansion of human activities into Earth's orbital space has enhanced global closure, because the effective distances in Earth's space make it very small. And because of the formidable natural barriers to human space activity, space is a planetary 'lid, not a 'frontier'. So one can say that the most important practical discovery of the 'space age' has been an improved understanding of the Earth. These lines of thinking, I find, would suggest the outlines of a more modest and Earth-centered space program, appropriate for the current Earth age. Overall, the fact that we can't readily expand into space is part of why we are in a new 'earth age' rather than a 'space age'.





You've argued against making the environment into a national security issue twenty years ago. Do the same now, considering that making the environment a bigger priority by making it into a national security issue might be the only way to prevent total environmental destruction?



When I started writing about the relationships between environment and security twenty years ago, not a great deal of work had been done on this topic. But several leading environmental thinkers were making the case that framing environmental issues as security issues, or what came to be called 'securitizing the environment', was not only a good strategy to get action on environmental problems, but also was useful analytically to think about these two domains. Unlike the subsequent criticisms of 'environmental security' made by Realists and scholars of conventional 'security studies', my criticism starts with the environmentalist premise that environmental deterioration is a paramount problem for contemporary humanity as a whole.



Those who want to 'securitize the environment' are attempting to do what William James a century ago proposed as a general strategy for social problem solving. Can we find, in James' language, 'a moral equivalent of war?' (Note the unfortunately acronym: MEOW). War and the threat of war, James observed, often lead to rapid and extensive mobilizations of effort. Can we somehow transfer these vast social energies to deal with other sets of problems? This is an enduring hope, particularly in the United States, where we have a 'war on drugs', a 'war on cancer', and a 'war on poverty'. But doing this for the environment, by 'securitizing the environment,' is unlikely to be very successful. And I fear that bringing 'security' orientations, institutions, and mindsets into environmental problem-solving will also bring in statist, nationalist, and militarist approaches. This will make environmental problem-solving more difficult, not easier, and have many baneful side-effects.



Another key point I think is important, is that the environment—and the various values and ends associated with habitat and the protection of habitat—are actually much more powerful and encompassing than those of security and violence. Instead of 'securitizing the environment' it is more promising is to 'environmentalize security'. Not many people think about the linkages between the environment and security-from-violence in this way, but I think there is a major case of it 'hiding in plain sight' in the trajectory of how the state-system and nuclear weapons have interacted.



When nuclear weapons were invented and first used in the 1940s, scientists were ignorant about many aspects of their effects. As scientists learned about these effects, and as this knowledge became public, many people started thinking and acting in different ways about nuclear choices. The fact that a ground burst of a nuclear weapon would produce substantial radioactive 'fall-out' was not appreciated until the first hydrogen bomb tests in the early 1950s. It was only then that scientists started to study what happened to radioactive materials dispersed widely in the environment. Evidence began to accumulate that some radioactive isotopes would be 'bio-focused', or concentrated by biological process. Public interest scientists began effectively publicizing this information, and mothers were alerted to the fact that their children's teeth were become radioactive. This new scientific knowledge about the environmental effects of nuclear explosions, and the public mobilizations it produced, played a key role in the first substantial nuclear arms control treaty, the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963, which banned nuclear weapons testing in the atmosphere, in the ocean, and in space. Thus, the old ways of providing security were circumscribed by new knowledge and new stakeholders of environmental health effects. The environment was not securitized, security was partially environmentalized.



Thus, while some accounts by arms control theorists emphasize the importance of 'social learning' in altering US-Soviet relations, an important part of this learning was not about the nature of social and political interactions, but about the environmental consequences of nuclear weapons. The learning that was most important in motivating so many actors (both within states and in mass publics) to seek changes in politics was 'natural learning,' or more specifically learning about the interaction of natural and technological systems.



An even more consequential case of the environmentalization of security occurred in the 1970's and 1980's. A key text here is Jonathan Schell's book, The Fate of the Earth. Schell's book, combining very high-quality journalism with first rate political theoretical reflections, lays out in measured terms the new discoveries of ecologists and atmospheric scientists about the broader planetary consequences of an extensive nuclear war. Not only would hundreds of millions of people be immediately killed and much of the planet's built infrastructure destroyed, but the planet earth's natural systems would be so altered that the extinction of complex life forms, among them homo sapiens, might result. The detonation of numerous nuclear weapons and the resultant burning of cities would probably dramatically alter the earth's atmosphere, depleting the ozone layer that protects life from lethal solar radiations, and filling the atmosphere with sufficient dust to cause a 'nuclear winter.' At stake in nuclear war, scientists had learned, was not just the fate of nations, but of the earth as a life support system. Conventional accounts of the nuclear age and of the end of the Cold War are loath to admit it, but it I believe it is clear that spreading awareness of these new natural-technological possibilities played a significant role in ending the Cold War and the central role that nuclear arms control occupies in the settlement of the Cold War. Again, traditional ways of achieving security-from-violence were altered by new knowledges about their environmental consequences—security practices and arrangements were partly environmentalized.



Even more radically, I think we can also turn this into a positive project. As I wrote two decades ago, environmental restoration would probably generate political externalities that would dampen tendencies towards violence. In other words, if we address the problem of the environment, then we will be drawn to do various things that will make various types of violent conflict less likely.





Your work is permeated by references to 'material factors'. This makes it different from branches of contemporary IR—like constructivism or postmodernism—which seem to be underpinned by a profound commitment to focus solely one side of the Cartesian divide. What is your take on the pervasiveness and implications of this 'social bias'?



Postmodernism and constructivism are really the most extreme manifestations of a broad trend over the last two centuries toward what I refer to as 'social-social science' and the decline—but hardly the end—of 'natural-social science'. Much of western thought prior to this turn was 'naturalist' and thus tended to downplay both human agency and ideas. At the beginning of the nineteenth century—partly because of the influence of German idealism, partly because of the great liberationist projects that promised to give better consequence to the activities and aspirations of the larger body of human populations (previously sunk in various forms of seemingly natural bondages), and partly because of the great expansion of human choice brought about by the science-based technologies of the Industrial Revolution—there was a widespread tendency to move towards 'social-social science,' the project of attempting to explain the human world solely by reference to the human world, to explain social outcomes with reference to social causes. While this was the dominant tendency, and a vastly productive one in many ways, it existed alongside and in interaction with what is really a modernized version of the earlier 'natural-social science.' Much of my work has sought to 'bring back in' and extend these 'natural-social' lines of argument—found in figures such as Dewey and H.G. Wells—into our thinking about the planetary situation.



In many parts of both European and American IR and related areas, Postmodern and constructivist theories have significantly contributed to IR theorists by enhancing our appreciation of ideas, language, and identities in politics. As a response to the limits and blindnesses of certain types of rationalist, structuralist, and functional theories, this renewed interest in the ideational is an important advance. Unfortunately, both postmodernism and constructivism have been marked by a strong tendency to go too far in their emphasis of the ideational. Postmodernism and constructivism have also helped make theorists much more conscious of the implicit—and often severely limiting—ontological assumptions that underlay, inform, and bound their investigations. This is also a major contribution to the study of world politics in all its aspects.



Unfortunately, this turn to ontology has also had intellectually limiting effects by going too far, in the search for a pure or nearly pure social ontology. With the growth in these two approaches, there has indeed been a decided decline in theorizing about the material. But elsewhere in the diverse world of theorizing about IR and the global, theorizing about the material never came anything close to disappearing or being eclipsed. For anyone thinking about the relationships between politics and nuclear weapons, space, and the environment, theorizing about the material has remained at the center, and it would be difficult to even conceive of how theorizing about the material could largely disappear. The recent 're-discovery of the material' associated with various self-styled 'new materialists' is a welcome, if belated, re-discovery for postmodernists and constructivists. For most of the rest of us, the material had never been largely dropped out.



A very visible example of the ways in which the decline in appropriate attention to the material, an excessive turn to the ideational, and the quest for a nearly pure social ontology, can lead theorizing astray is the core argument in Alexander Wendt's main book, Social Theory of International Politics, one of the widely recognized landmarks of constructivist IR theory. The first part of the book advances a very carefully wrought and sophisticated argument for a nearly pure ideational social ontology. The material is explicitly displaced into a residue or rump of unimportance. But then, to the reader's surprise, the material, in the form of 'common fate' produced by nuclear weapons, and climate change, reappears and is deployed to play a really crucial role in understanding contemporary change in world politics. 



My solution is to employ a mixed ontology. By this I mean that I think several ontologically incommensurate and very different realities are inescapable parts the human world. These 'unlikes' are inescapable parts of any argument, and must somehow be combined. There are a vast number of ways in which they can be combined, and on close examination, virtually all arguments in the social sciences are actually employing some version of a mixed ontology, however implicitly and under-acknowledged.



But not all combinations are equally useful in addressing all questions. In my version of mixed ontology—which I call 'practical naturalism'—human social agency is understood to be occurring 'between two natures': on the one hand the largely fixed nature of humans, and on the other the changing nature composed of the material world, a shifting amalgam of actual non-human material nature of geography and ecology, along with human artifacts and infrastructures. Within this frame, I posit as rooted in human biological nature, a set of 'natural needs,' most notably for security-from-violence and habitat services. Then I pose questions of functionality, by which I mean: which combinations of material practices, political structures, ideas and identities are needed to achieve these ends in different material contexts? Answering this question requires the formulation of various 'historical materialist' propositions, which in turn entails the systematic formulation of typologies and variation in both the practices, structures and ideas, and in material contexts. These arguments are not centered on explaining what has or what will happen. Instead they are practical in the sense that they are attempting to answer the question of 'what is to be done' given the fixed ends and given changing material contexts. I think this is what advocates of arms control and environmental sustainability are actually doing when they claim that one set of material practices and their attendant political structures, identities and ideas must be replaced with another if basic human needs are to going to continue to be meet in the contemporary planetary material situation created by the globalization of machine civilization on earth.

                                  

Since this set of arguments is framed within a mixed ontology, ideas and identities are a vital part of the research agenda. Much of the energy of postmodern and many varieties of critical theory have focused on 'deconstructing' various identities and ideas. This critical activity has produced and continues to produce many insights of theorizing about politics. But I think there is an un-tapped potential for theorists who are interested in ideas and identities, and who want their work to make a positive contribution to practical problem-solving in the contemporary planetary human situation in what might be termed a 'constructive constructivism'. This concerns a large practical theory agenda—and an urgent one at that, given the rapid increase in planetary problems—revolving around the task of figuring out which ideas and identities are appropriate for the planetary world, and in figuring out how they can be rapidly disseminated. Furthermore, thinking about how to achieve consciousness change of this sort is not something ancillary to the greenpeace project but vital to it. My thinking on how this should and might be done centers the construction of a new social narrative, centered not on humanity but on the earth.





Is it easy to plug your mixed ontology and interests beyond the narrow confines of IR or even the walls of the ivory tower into processes of collective knowledge proliferation in IR—a discipline increasingly characterized by compartimentalization and specialization?



The great plurality of approaches in IR today is indispensible and a welcome change. The professionalization of IR and the organization of intellectual life has some corruptions and pitfalls that are best avoided. The explosion of 'isms' and of different perspectives has been valuable and necessary in many ways, but it has also helped to foster and empower sectarian tendencies that confound the advance of knowledge. Some of the adherents of some sects and isms boast openly of establishing 'citation cartels' to favor themselves and their friends. Some theorists also have an unfortunate tendency to assume that because they have adopted a label that what they actually do is the actually the realization of the label. Thus we have 'realists' with limited grasp on realities, 'critical theorists' who repeat rather than criticize the views of other 'critical theorists,' and anti-neoliberals who are ruthless Ayn Rand-like self aggrandizers. The only way to fully address these tendencies is to talk to people you disagree with, and find and communicate with people in other disciplines.



Another consequence of this sectarianism is visible in the erosion of scholarly standards of citation. The system of academic incentives is configured to reward publication, and the publication of ideas that are new. This has a curiously perverse impact on the achievement of cumulativity. One seemingly easy and attractive path to saying something new is to say something old in new language, to say something said in another sect or field in the language of your sect or field, or easiest of all, simply ignore what other people have said if it is too much like what you are trying to say. George Santyana is wide quoted in saying that 'those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.' For academics it can unfortunately be said, 'those who can successfully forget what past academics said are free to say it again, and thus advance toward tenure.' When rampant sectarianism and decline in standards of citation is combined with a broader cultural tendency to valorize self-expression and authenticity, academic work can become an exercise in abstract self expressionism.



Confining one's intellectual life within one 'ism' or sect is sure to be self-limiting. Many of the most important and interesting questions arise between and across the sects and schools. Also, there are great opportunities in learning from people who do not fully share your assumptions and approaches. Seriously engaging the work and ideas of scholars in other sects can be very very valuable. Scholars in different sects and schools are also often really taking positions that are not so different as their labels would suggest. Perhaps because my research agenda fits uncomfortably within any of the established schools and isms, I have found particularly great value in seeking out and talking on a sustained basis with people with very different approaches.





My final question is about normativity and the way that normativity is perceived: In Europe and the United States, liberal Internationalism is increasingly considered as hollowed out, as a discursive cover for a tendency to attempt to control and regulate the world—or as an unguided idealistic missile. Doesn't adapting to a post-hegemonic world require dropping such ambitions?



American foreign policy has never been entirely liberal internationalist. Many other ideas and ideologies and approaches have often played important roles in shaping US foreign policy. But the United States, for a variety of reasons, has pursued liberal internationalist foreign policy agendas more extensively, and successfully, than any other major state in the modern state system, and the world, I think, has been made better off in very important ways by these efforts.



The net impact of the United States and of American grand strategy and particularly those parts of American brand strategy that have been more liberal internationalist in their character, has been enormously positive for the world. It has produced not a utopia by any means, but has brought about an era with more peace and security, prosperity, and freedom for more people than ever before in history.



Both American foreign policy and liberal internationalism have been subject to strong attacks from a variety of perspectives. Recently some have characterized liberal internationalism as a type of American imperialism, or as a cloak for US imperialism. Virtually every aspect of American foreign policy has been contested within the United States. Liberal internationalists have been strong enemies of imperialism and military adventurism, whether American or from other states. This started with the Whig's opposition to the War with Mexico and the Progressive's opposition to the Spanish-American War, and continued with liberal opposition to the War in Vietnam.



The claim that liberal internationalism leads to or supports American imperialism has also been recently voiced by many American realists, perhaps most notably John Mearsheimer (Theory Talk #49). He and others argue that liberal internationalism played a significant role in bringing about the War on Iraq waged by the W. Bush administration. This was indeed one of the great debacles of US foreign policy. But the War in Iraq was actually a war waged by American realists for reasons grounded in realist foreign policy thinking. It is true, as Mearsheimer emphasizes, that many academic realists criticized the Bush administration's plans and efforts in the invasion in Iraq. Some self-described American liberal internationalists in the policy world supported the war, but almost all academic American liberal internationalists were strongly opposed, and much of the public opposition to the war was on grounds related to liberal internationalist ideas.



It is patently inaccurate to say that main actors in the US government that instigated the War on Iraq were liberal internationalists. The main initiators of the war were Richard Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. Whatever can be said about those two individuals, they are not liberal internationalists. They initiated the war because they thought that the Saddam Hussein regime was a threat to American interests—basically related to oil. The Saddam regime was seen as a threat to American-centered regional hegemony in the Middle East, an order whose its paramount purpose has been the protection of oil, and the protection of the regional American allies that posses oil. Saddam Hussein was furthermore a demonstrated regional revisionist likely to seek nuclear weapons, which would greatly compromise American military abilities in the region. Everything else the Bush Administration's public propaganda machine said to justify the war was essentially window dressing for this agenda. Far from being motivated by a liberal internationalist agenda the key figures in the Bush Administration viewed the collateral damage to international institutions produced by the war as a further benefit, not a cost, of the war. It is particularly ironic that John Mearsheimer would be a critic of this war, which seems in many ways a 'text book' application of a central claim of his 'offensive realism,' that powerful states can be expected, in the pursuit of their security and interests, to seek to become and remain regional hegemons.



Of course, liberal internationalism, quite aside from dealing with these gross mischaracterizations propagated by realists, must also look to the future. The liberal internationalism that is needed for today and tomorrow is going to be in some ways different from the liberal internationalism of the twentieth century. This is a large topic that many people, but not enough, are thinking about. In a recent working paper for the Council on Foreign Relations, John Ikenberry and I have laid out some ways in which we think American liberal internationalism should proceed. The starting point is the recognition that the United States is not as 'exceptional' in its precocious liberal-democratic character, not as 'indispensible' for the protection of the balance of power or the advance of freedom, or as easily 'hegemonic' as it has been historically. But the world is now also much more democratic than ever before, with democracies old and new, north and south, former colonizers and former colonies, and in every civilizational flavor. The democracies also face an array of difficult domestic problems, are thickly enmeshed with one another in many ways, and have a vital role to play in solving global problems. We suggest that the next liberal internationalism in American foreign policy should focus on American learning from the successes of other democracies in solving problems, focus on 'leading by example of successful problem-solving' and less with 'carrots and sticks,' make sustained efforts to moderate the inequalities and externalities produced by de-regulated capitalism, devote more attention to building community among the democracies, and make sustained efforts to 'recast global bargains' and the distribution of authority in global institutions to better incorporate the interests of 'rising powers.'





Daniel Deudney is Associate Professor and Director of Undergraduate Studies in Political Science at Johns Hopkins University. He has published widely in political theory and international relations, on substantive issues such as nuclear weapons, the environment as a security issue, liberal and realist international relations theory, and geopolitics.





Related links



Deudney's Faculty Profile at Johns Hopkins
Read Deudney & Ikenberry's Democratic Internationalism: An American Grand Strategy for a Post-exceptionalist Era (Council on Foreign Relations Working Paper, 2012) here (pdf) 
Read Deudney et al's Global Shift: How the West Should Respond to the Rise of China (2011 Transatlantic Academy report) here (pdf) 
Read the introduction of Deudney's Bounding Power (2007) here (pdf) 
Read Deudney's Bringing Nature Back In: Geopolitical Theory from the Greeks to the Global Era (1999 book chapter) here (pdf) 
Read Deudney & Ikenberry's Who Won the Cold War? (Foreign Policy, 1992) here (pdf) 
Read Deudney's The Case Against Linking Environmental Degradation and National Security (Millennium, 1990) here (pdf) 
Read Deudney's Rivers of Energy: The Hydropower Potential (WorldWatch Institute Paper, 1981) here (pdf) 









Print version of this Talk (pdf)

Threats To International Peace And Security. The Situation In The Middle East ; United Nations S/PV.8231 Security Council Seventy-third year 8231st meeting Friday, 13 April 2018, 10 a.m. New York Provisional President: Mr. Meza-Cuadra . (Peru) Members: Bolivia (Plurinational State of). . Mr. Llorentty Solíz China. . Mr. Ma Zhaoxu Côte d'Ivoire. . Mr. Tanoh-Boutchoue Equatorial Guinea. . Mr. Ndong Mba Ethiopia. . Mr. Alemu France. . Mr. Delattre Kazakhstan. . Mr. Umarov Kuwait. . Mr. Alotaibi Netherlands. . Mr. Van Oosterom Poland. . Ms. Wronecka Russian Federation. . Mr. Nebenzia Sweden . Mr. Skoog United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . Ms. Pierce United States of America. . Mrs. Haley Agenda Threats to international peace and security The situation in the Middle East This record contains the text of speeches delivered in English and of the translation of speeches delivered in other languages. The final text will be printed in the Official Records of the Security Council. Corrections should be submitted to the original languages only. They should be incorporated in a copy of the record and sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service, room U-0506 (verbatimrecords@un.org). Corrected records will be reissued electronically on the Official Document System of the United Nations (http://documents.un.org). 18-10728 (E) *1810728* S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 2/22 18-10728 The meeting was called to order at 10.05 a.m. Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. Threats to international peace and security The situation in the Middle East The President (spoke in Spanish): In accordance with rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to participate in this meeting. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I wish to warmly welcome His Excellency Secretary-General António Guterres, to whom I now give the floor. The Secretary-General: The situation in the Middle East is in chaos to such an extent it has become a threat to international peace and security. The region is facing a true Gordian knot — different fault lines crossing each other and creating a highly volatile situation with risks of escalation, fragmentation and division as far as the eye can see, with profound regional and global ramifications. We see a multiplicity of divides. The first is the memory of the Cold War. But, to be precise, it is more than a simple memory: the Cold War is back with a vengeance — but with a difference. The mechanisms and the safeguards to manage the risks of escalation that existed in the past no longer seem to be present. Secondly, there is the Palestinian-Israeli divide. Thirdly, there is the Sunni-Shia divide, evident from the Gulf to the Mediterranean. It is important to note that apparent religious divides are normally the result of political or geostrategic manipulation. Finally, there is a wide range of different factors — from opposing attitudes in relation to the role of the Muslim Brotherhood or the status of the Kurds, to the dramatic threats to communities that have been living in the region for millenniums and are part of the rich diversity of Middle Eastern societies. Those numerous divisions are reflected in a multiplicity of conflicts with different degrees of interconnection, several of which are clearly linked to the threat of global terrorism. Many forms of escalation are possible. We see the wounds of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict continuing to fester. The recent violence in Gaza resulted in many needless deaths and injuries. I repeat my call for an independent and transparent investigation into those incidents. I also appeal to those concerned to refrain from any act that could lead to further casualties, in particular any measures that could place civilians in harm's way. That tragedy underlines the urgency of revitalizing the peace process for a two- State solution that will allow Palestinians and Israelis to live side by side in peace in two democratic States within secure and recognized borders. I reaffirm the readiness of the United Nations to support those efforts. In Yemen, we are witnessing the worst humanitarian disaster in today's world. There is only one pathway to ending the Yemeni conflict and to addressing the humanitarian crisis: a negotiated political settlement through inclusive intra-Yemeni dialogue. My Special Envoy, Martin Griffiths, is doing everything possible to facilitate that political settlement. He will brief the Council next week. In Libya, I encourage all parties to continue to work with my Special Representative, Ghassan Salamé, as he engages in the political process with a broad range of Libyan interlocutors across the country in order to implement the United Nations action plan. It is high time to end the Libyan conflict. The case of Iraq demonstrates that progress is possible with concerted local, regional and global commitment. With the defeat of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, having overcome the risk of fragmentation, the Government of Iraq must now focus on reconstruction, reforms and reconciliation. I hope that the upcoming elections will consolidate that progress. At the recent Paris and Rome conferences, the international community reaffirmed its support for Lebanon's sovereignty, stability and State security institutions. It is absolutely essential to prevent a new Israel-Hizbullah conflict, which could inevitably result in many more victims and much greater destruction than the last war. I reiterate the critical importance to act on key principles and commitments on Lebanon, including the Security Council resolutions, such as resolution 1701 (2006), and the policy of disassociation. The dangers of the links to the Syrian conflict are 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 3/22 evident in the recent confrontations between Iran and Israel in Syria.Syria today indeed represents the most serious threat to international peace and security. We see there confrontations and proxy wars, involving several national armies, a number of armed opposition groups, many national and international militia, foreign fighters from everywhere in the world and various terrorist organizations. From the beginning, we have witnessed systematic violations of international humanitarian law, international human rights law and international law, in general, in utter disregard for the letter and spirit of the Charter of the United Nations.For eight long years, the people of Syria have endured suffering upon suffering. I reiterate that there is no military solution to the conflict. The solution must be political through the Geneva intra-Syrian talks, as stipulated in resolution 2254 (2015), and in line with the consistent efforts of my Special Envoy, Staffan de Mistura. Syrians have lived through a litany of horrors: atrocity crimes, sieges, starvation, indiscriminate attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure, the use of chemical weapons, forced displacement, sexual violence, torture, detention and enforced disappearances. The list goes on.In a moment of hope, the Security Council adopted resolution 2401 (2018), demanding that all parties cease hostilities without delay for a durable humanitarian pause. Unfortunately, no such cessation of hostilities ever really took place. That is the bleak panorama of Syria today.In that panorama, I am outraged by the continued reports of the use of chemical weapons in Syria. I reiterate my strong condemnation of the use of chemical weapons by any party to the conflict under any circumstances. Their use is abhorrent and a clear violation of international law. The seriousness of the recent allegations requires a thorough investigation, using impartial, independent and professional expertise.In that regard, I reaffirm my full support for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and its Fact-finding Mission in undertaking the required investigation into those allegations. The mission should be granted full access, without any restrictions or impediments, to perform its activities. I take note that the Syrian Government has requested that and is committed to facilitating it. The first OPCW team is already in Syria; a second team is expected today or tomorrow.However, we need to go further. In a letter to the Council two days ago, I expressed, following the end of the mandate of the OPCW-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism,"my deep disappointment that the Security Council was unable to agree upon a dedicated mechanism to attribute responsibility for the use of chemical weapons in Syria".I want to repeat today that the norms against chemical weapons must be upheld. As I wrote in the same letter:"[e]nsuring accountability for a confirmed use of chemical weapons is our responsibility, not least to the victims of such attacks. A lack of accountability emboldens those who would use such weapons by providing them with the reassurance of impunity. This, in turn, further weakens the norm proscribing the use of chemical weapons and the international disarmament and non-proliferation architecture as a whole. I urge all Member States to act responsibly in these dangerous circumstances;"I appeal to the Security Council to fulfil its duties and not to give up on efforts to agree upon a dedicated, impartial, objective and independent mechanism for attributing responsibility with regard to the use of chemical weapons. I stand ready to support such efforts."The increasing tensions and the inability to reach a compromise in the establishment of an accountability mechanism threaten to lead to a full-blown military escalation. In my contacts with the members of the Security Council, particularly the permanent members, I have reiterated my deep concerns about the risks of the current impasse and stressed the need to prevent the situation from spiralling out of control.That is exactly the risk that we face today — that things spiral out of control. It is our common duty to stop it.The President (spoke in Spanish): I thank the Secretary-General for his valuable briefing.I shall now give the floor to those Council members who wish to make statements.S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 4/22 18-10728 Mr. Nebenzia (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We are greatful to the Secretary-General for his briefing. His participation, his assessments and his authoritative words about the situation that has developed are very significant. We agree with him that there are many wounds in the Middle East. However, most important, currently the deepest wound is the situation in Syria, insofar as any negative repercussions would have major global implications.Two days ago, news of a threat by the United States to launch missile strikes against the Syrian Arab Republic ricocheted around the world. The Russian Federation was also warned to prepare for strikes. Let me point out that our military is in Syria at the invitation of its legitimate Government in order to combat international terrorism. We continue to see dangerous military preparations for an illegal act of force against a sovereign State in violation of the norms of international law. It is not just the use of force but even the threat of it that flies in the face of the Charter of the United Nations, and that is precisely what we are seeing in the most recent statements and actions of Washington and its allies. The bellicose rhetoric is being ratcheted up at every level, including at the very top. Additional forces and assets of the United States military and its allies are bearing down on the Syrian coast. It feels as though Washington is singlemindedly heading towards unleashing a military scenario against Syria. That cannot be permitted. Such developments would be fraught with terrible consequences for global security, especially considering that a Russian military contingent is deployed in Syria.There are also those who have been observing these risky preparations with tacit approval, declaring that they understand Washington's motives or engaging in direct incitement, thereby becoming potential accomplices in an act of reckless military adventurism. There are people in the Security Council who love to talk about preventive diplomacy. Right now, for some reason, they are nowhere to be seen or heard. The guilty parties have been speedily identified not just before any investigation has been conducted but even before it has been established whether the incident in question took place at all, but evidently they must still be punished. Someone will have to answer for these unfortunate developments and for the previous interventions that have engulfed many countries in years of crisis with untold casualties.Witness the recent experience of Iraq and Libya, which, among other things, shows that the attitude of America's leaders to the Security Council is largely one of convenience. They need it as cover for their Iraqi test tubes and Libyan no-fly zones. What they are presenting us with now is another virtual test tube, and an empty one. The reckless behaviour of the United States as it tramples on international law and State sovereignty is unworthy of its status as a permanent member of the Security Council, which presupposes the highest possible degree of responsibility and certainly not a right to sabre rattling, a right that is unknown in international law.Why does the United States continue to torture the Middle East, provoking one conflict after another and pitting the States of the region against one another? Who will benefit from a potential strike against the Syrian military, which is taking the brunt of the fight against terrorism and achieving major victories in it? We know for sure that the ringleaders of the Syrian armed groups were given orders to launch an offensive after a possible military action. Is this latest wave of chaos really being unleashed just for that?The excuse is the alleged use of toxic substances in the Syrian town of Douma on 7 April, for which there has been no reliable confirmation. Our specialists found no trace of the use of toxic substances. The residents of Douma know of no such attack. All the evidence of the alleged attack has been provided by anti-Government forces for whom this development is in their interests. We have good reason — indeed, we have information — leading us to believe that what took place was a provocation with the participation of various countries' intelligence services. We have been issuing warnings about this for a long time. It is a repeat of the Khan Shaykhun scenario in April of last year.The Syrian Government, for which this is clearly the last thing it needs, has said that it was not involved and has sent a request for an immediate inspection by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) of the location of the alleged incident. It has offered security guarantees jointly with the Russian military. The mission is already getting started on its work in Syria and we hope that it will be able to conduct a truly independent and impartial investigation.Only the Security Council has the authority at the international level to decide what measures to take and against whom in connection with the use of chemical 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 5/22 weapons in Syria. Russia will continue to work diligently and systematically to de-escalate the recent tensions in international relations. We proposed adopting a brief resolution in support of the OPCW inspection mission in Douma that the United States, Britain and France irresponsibly blocked, thereby demonstrating their lack of interest in an investigation. The only thing they care about is overthrowing the Syrian Government and, more broadly, deterring the Russian Federation. This has been clearly visible in other international and domestic political events built on unfounded hoaxes and conspiracy theories that always centre around the Russian Federation.What is the United States trying to achieve? After many years of internecine strife in Syria, significant areas of the country have been stabilized. The political process is reviving and indicators of national reconciliation are emerging. The terrorists have been dealt a significant blow. We have never denied that the United States has also made a certain contribution to achieving that shared goal, but it has always kept certain types of terrorists in reserve for its fight against the so-called regime and for advancing its geopolitical priorities in the region.My British colleague is always asking me what Russia is doing to implement resolution 2401 (2018). My answer is that my country is practically the only one that is doing anything about it. Over the course of the Astana process, peace has been restored in more than 2,500 towns and villages. That does not mean that they have become victims of the regime, as the United States calls it, merely that with the help of Russia and other guarantors they have established normal relations with the central authorities in Damascus. With the support of the United Nations, the Syrian National Dialogue Congress was held successfully in Sochi. How many towns and villages has the United States brought peace to? How many groups has it persuaded to join the ceasefire agreements?In order to break the deadlock in the situation in eastern Ghouta after the adoption of resolution 2401 (2018), complex negotiations were conducted with the leaders of armed groups, with Russian assistance. The militias and their family members were safely evacuated from the district, and civilians were finally given the opportunity to shake off years of terror. Film of their genuine joy exists, but the Western media is not showing it. The United States does not care about the fate of the prisoners of the militias in eastern Ghouta who had been supporters of the Syrian Government. When they were bargaining with the Syrian authorities to exchange prisoners, the militias claimed that they were holding between 2,000 and 4,000 people. Now it turns out that there are far fewer. People died from harsh treatment and hard labour digging huge tunnels for their torturers.Some members have grieved to see their bearded pilgrims setting off for Syria on free tourist tickets. They lost no opportunity to shriek from every street corner about the plight of the hundreds of thousands of people in besieged eastern Ghouta. Now those people need help in rebuilding normal lives, but these Council members have already lost interest because the area is under Government control. Now there will have to be unpleasant discussions about the blockade of Fo'ah and Kefraya. When was the last time a humanitarian convoy was there? When was the last time Council members even asked about it? Someone must answer for the coalition's destruction of Raqqa.These are dangerous developments, with far-reaching ramifications for global security. In this instance, responsibility lies entirely with the United States and its allies. It is a pity that Old Europe continues to lose face. We call on the leaders of these States to immediately reconsider, return to the international legal fold and not to lead the world to the dangerous brink. We urgently need to find a peaceful way out through a collective effort. The Russian Federation is ready to cooperate equitably with all partners and to solve the problems that may arise through dialogue. We will continue to focus on finding a peaceful settlement to the conflict in Syria based on established international law. We will continue to work actively to that end, and we call on all our partners to do the same.Mrs. Haley (United States of America): I started to listen to my Russian friend so as to respond to him, but instead I am truly in awe of his ability to say what he said with a straight face.Today's meeting of the Security Council has been convened under truly strange circumstances. The Russian Federation has asked us to discuss what it calls unilateral threats related to Syria. What is strange is that Russia is ignoring the real threat to international peace and security that has brought us all here. It is ignoring its own unilateral responsibility for all of it. What we should discuss today is the use of deadly chemical weapons to murder innocent Syrian S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 6/22 18-10728 civilians. That is one of the most blatant and grotesque violations of international law in the world today. It is a violation of all standards of morality. It violates the long-standing international consensus that chemical weapons represent a unique evil. Chlorine, mustard gas and other chemical weapons killed 90,000 people and injured more than 1 million during the First World War. In the history Canada in the Great World War, the Canadian soldier A.T. Hunter described it this way."The gas cloud gathered itself like a wave and ponderously lapped over into the trenches. Then passive curiosity turned to active torment — a burning sensation in the head, red-hot needles in the lungs, the throat seized by a strangler. Many fell and died on the spot. The others, gasping, stumbling with faces contorted, hands widely gesticulating and uttering hoarse cries of pain, fled madly through the villages and farms and through the city itself, carrying panic to the remnants of the civilian population and filling the roads with fugitives of both sexes and all ages".Chemical weapons did not produce the most casualties in the First World War, but they were the most feared. In the Second World War chemical weapons were employed on an industrial scale against civilians, resulting in the worst genocide in human history, which the United States recalled just yesterday on Holocaust Remembrance Day. That is what brings us here today. That is what chemical weapons are all about. That is why we must not stay silent in the face of the horrible use of chemical weapons in our own time.The first response to all of this death and injury was the 1925 Geneva Protocol, which banned the use of chemical weapons and more. Later, in 1993, the Chemical Weapons Convention was signed. It obligates all of its parties to never under any circumstances"develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain chemical weapons, or transfer, directly or indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone".It also prohibits all parties from helping anyone to engage in such activities. The United States is a party to the Convention. Russia is a party to the Convention. Every country that is currently a member of the Security Council is a party to the Convention. Even the Al-Assad regime has pledged to abide by the Convention, so in theory all of us agree on the core principle at stake today. No country can by allowed to use chemical weapons with impunity. Now that we have established what we all agree on, let us ask ourselves what we should be condemning today. We should be discussing the actions that truly brought us to this moment in time. We should not be condemning the country or group of countries that might have the courage to stand up in defence of our common principle against the use of chemical weapons. Instead, we should be condemning the country that has unilaterally prevented the Security Council from upholding it.Which member of the Council most exhibits unilateralism with regard to chemical weapons? It is Russia alone that has stopped at nothing to defend the Syrian regime's multiple instances of the use of chemical weapons. It is Russia alone that killed the Joint Investigative Mechanism, which enabled the world to ensure accountability for the use of chemical weapons in Syria. It is Russia alone that has used its veto six times to prevent the condemnation of Al-Assad's use of chemical weapons. It is Russia alone that has used its veto 12 times to protect the Al-Assad regime. To make matters worse, it was Russia alone that agreed to be the guarantor of the removal of all chemical weapons in Syria. If Russia had lived up to its commitment, there would be no chemical weapons in Syria and we would not be here today. That is the Russian record of unilateralism. It is a record that has led to the trashing of all international standards against the use of chemical weapons. This meeting should not be about so-called unilateral threats, but rather about the multiple actions that Russia has taken to bring us to this point.Our President has not yet made a decision about possible actions in Syria, but should the United States and its allies decide to act in Syria, it will be in defence of a principle on which we all agree. It will be in defence of a bedrock international norm that benefits all nations. Let us be clear. Al-Assad's most recent use of poison gas against the people of Douma was not his first, second, third or even forty-ninth use of chemical weapons. The United States estimates that Al-Assad has used chemical weapons in the Syrian war at least 50 times. Public estimates are as high as 200.In the weeks after Al-Assad's sarin-gas attack last April, which killed nearly 100 people, including many children, the regime used chlorine gas at least once and possibly as many as three times in the same area. Last November, just as the mandate of the Joint Investigative Mechanism expired, the regime again attacked its people with sarin in the Damascus suburbs.13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 7/22 In January, Al-Assad used at least four chlorine-filled rockets in Douma, and then he struck again last weekend. Thanks to Russia, there was no United Nations body to determine blame. But we know who did this; our allies know who did this. Russia can complain all it wants about fake news, but no one is buying its lies and its coverups. Russia was supposed to guarantee that Al-Assad would not use chemical weapons, and Russia did the opposite.The world must not passively accept the use of chemical weapons after almost a century of their prohibition. Everything the United Nations stands for is being blatantly defied in Syria, with the help of a permanent member of the Council. All nations and all peoples will be harmed if we allow Al-Assad to normalize the use of chemical weapons. It is those who act to violate the prohibition of chemical weapons who deserve our condemnation. Those who act to defend it deserve our support. The United States and its allies will continue to stand up for truth, accountability, justice and an end to the use of chemical weapons.Mr. Ma Zhaoxu (China) (spoke in Chinese): I thank Secretary-General Guterres for his briefing and deeply appreciate his tireless efforts on the issue of the Middle East and that of Syria.The current situation in Syria is perilous. The country is at the crossroads of war and peace, and China is following the developments there with great concern. The possibility of an escalation of tensions worries us deeply. The pressing priority of the moment is to launch a comprehensive, objective and impartial investigation into the relevant incidents in order to arrive at authoritative conclusions.China has consistently stood in favour of the peaceful settlement of disputes and opposed the routine use or threat of force in international relations. To take unilateral military action by circumventing the Security Council is inconsistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and runs counter to the basic norms enshrined in international law and those governing international relations.Syria's sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity must be fully respected. We call on the parties concerned to remain calm, exercise restraint, refrain from any move that could lead to further escalation of the situation and resolve the issue peacefully through consultation and dialogue. China is convinced that there can be no military solution to the Syrian issue; the only way out is a political settlement. China supports the United Nations in playing an active role in safeguarding the authority and standing of the Organization and its Security Council.China calls on the international community to steadfastly continue its diplomatic efforts, tirelessly stay the course so as to settle the Syrian issue politically, give full play to the role of the United Nations as the main mediator, and resolve without delay the Syrian issue comprehensively, justly and adequately, in keeping with the provisions of the relevant Security Council resolutions.The people of the world yearn for peace and oppose war. The situation in Syria has ramifications for peace and stability in the Middle East and the world at large, as well as for the credibility and authority of the Council. At this critical juncture, the Council must rightfully discharge its sacred responsibility emanating from the Charter of the United Nations; act in line with the dictates of our times; build unity and consensus and do its utmost to maintain peace; leave no stone unturned in its efforts to prevent war; and live up to the trust and expectations of the international community.China is and has always been a builder of world peace, a contributor to global development and a defender of the international order. China stands ready to continue its unflagging efforts to safeguard peace and stability in the Middle East and the world at large, in a spirit of responsibility to history and to the peoples of the world.Mr. Delattre (France) (spoke in French): I thank the Secretary-General for his statement.We are meeting today to address the threats to international peace and security that have arisen as a result of the situation in Syria, six days after the latest chemical-weapons carnage, on 7 April in Douma.For seven years, the situation in Syria has without a doubt constituted a grave threat to international peace and security as defined in the Charter of the United Nations. The Security Council itself characterized this as such unanimously on 27 September 2013, when resolution 2118 (2013) was adopted in the wake of the appalling chemical-weapons attacks that had taken place in eastern Ghouta. The world then learned for the first time and with horror of the symptoms of large-scale chemical-weapons-related deaths in Syria.S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 8/22 18-10728 To counter those who are seeking to sow confusion, going so far as to accuse the Syrian people of having gassed themselves; those who are suggesting conspiracy theories; those who are endeavouring methodically to destroy our mechanisms for action on chemical weapons in Syria, we must come back to simple facts. Yes, the Syrian crisis represents a threat to international peace and security. This threat is related to the repeated, organized and systematic use of chemical weapons by the Bashar Al-Assad regime, which once again reached new levels of horror with the two attacks perpetrated in Douma on 7 April last. Those attacks claimed the lives of at least several dozen people and wounded hundreds of others. Many of the injured will continue to suffer throughout their lives from the serious respiratory and neurological aftereffects of the chemicals used.There is no doubt once again as to the responsibility of Damascus for this attack. The facts collected on the ground, the symptoms of the victims, the complexity of handling of the substances used, and the determination of the regime's forces to subjugate the last pockets of resistance in Douma as expeditiously as possible and using every means at their disposal, all point to this.This is a well-known and documented modus operandi, given that an independent mechanism, created at the initiative of the Security Council, had already established at least four times since 2015 that chemical weapons had been used by the Damascus regime in Sarmin, Talmenes, Qmenas and Khan Shaykun — an investigative mechanism that a permanent member of the Security Council decided last November to force into silence.The chemical-weapons policy of the Bashar Al-Assad regime is among the most serious violations of all the norms that guarantee our collective security. It is first and foremost a violation of all international obligations relating to the prohibition of chemical weapons under the Chemical Weapons Convention, to which Syria is a party.Secondly, it constitutes a violation of the very foundations of international humanitarian law, namely, the principles of distinction, precaution and proportionality.Thirdly, it constitutes a breach of successive Security Council resolutions: resolutions 2118 (2013), 2209 (2015) and 2235 (2015) and therefore a breach of the obligations incumbent upon Syria under the Charter of the United Nations.Lastly, the use of chemical weapons against civilians, which was banned in 1925 under the Geneva Protocol, constitutes a war crime under the Statute of the International Criminal Court.The Secretary-General in August 2013 called the use of chemical weapons a crime against humanity. That chemical war is a tool to accelerate a deliberate policy of submission by terror, which, in seven years, has caused the deaths of 400,000 people, the deliberate destruction of civilian and health infrastructure in entire regions, a massive exodus of refugees and displaced persons and has fuelled international terrorism. This frightening picture is that of one of the most blatant threats to international peace and security in the contemporary era. It is also the record of those who, against all odds, continue to support it.I will once again have to state the obvious: if Syria has continued to use toxic substances for military purposes, it is because it has retained the capacity to use and manufacture them, in contravention of its international commitments, of the guarantees provided by Russia in the framework of the 2013 Russian-American agreement and of Security Council resolutions.It has already been several years since the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) informed us of the major remaining doubts about the sincerity of Syria's initial declaration to the organization in 2013. Many of the OPCW's questions and requests for documents have gone unanswered. Syria has never provided a satisfactory explanation for the inspectors' discovery of substances and capabilities that Syria had never declared. We saw those capabilities again in action on 7 April, used to kill as many civilians as possible and terrorize the survivors to consolidate the definitive takeover of Douma by the Syrian regime.Beyond Syria, the prevailing impunity since 2013 affects the entire chemical non-proliferation regime, and with it the entire security system that we have collectively built since the Second World War. It is that collective security legacy, built to protect future generations from the outbreaks of violence in the two global conflicts, that the members of the Security Council have been mandated to protect. To allow the normalization of the use of chemical weapons without reacting is to let the genie out of the bottle. That would be a terrible setback to international order, for which we would all pay the price.13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 9/22 The Security Council, to which the Charter of the United Nations entrusts the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security on behalf of the entire international community, is therefore more than justified in meeting today. It is more than justified for the Council to note, once again, the violation of international law and its own resolutions, and the persistence of a proven threat to international peace and security. It is more than justified to urgently re-establish a mechanism for attributing responsibility for chemical attacks — that opportunity was given to the Council in vain, once again, on Tuesday (see S/PV.8228) with the American draft resolution (S/2018/321).The Council is more than justified in doing what it has committed itself to do, that is, to take measures under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. But in the face of the mass atrocities committed in Syria, the Council's action has been paralysed for several years by successive Russian vetoes. Russia vetoed 12 draft resolutions on Syria, including six on the chemical issue alone. Those vetoes had no other objective than to protect the Syrian authorities — to guarantee a regime of impunity, in defiance of all international standards. To allow the indefensible, Russia has deliberately chosen to sacrifice the ability of the Council to act, the most important tool of our collective security. We had proof of that again last Tuesday.On 7 April, Douma joined Ypres, Halabja and Khan Shaykhun in the litany of chemical massacres. I solemnly say that, in deciding to once again use chemical weapons, the regime reached a point of no return on 7 April. France will assume its responsibility to put an end to an intolerable threat to our collective security and to finally ensure respect for international law and the measures taken for years by the Security Council.A chemical attack like that of Douma, which consists in gassing the last inhabitants of a besieged enclave — even when it is about to fall, even when the last fighters are negotiating their surrender — is the height of cynicism. That is where we are after seven years of the regime's war against its people. This is the situation to which the world must provide a firm, united and resolute response. That is our responsibility today.It will also be essential to combat impunity for those responsible for the use of such weapons and, more broadly, for those who are responsible for the most serious crimes committed in Syria. France is fully committed to that endeavour. That is the purpose of the International Partnership against Impunity for the Use of Chemical Weapons, which we initiated last January. We will also continue to support and assist all international mechanisms in their work to investigate the most serious crimes committed against civilians in Syria.In addition to the chemical issue, continuing violations of international humanitarian law must cease without delay. We ourselves demanded it by unanimously adopting resolution 2401 (2018) — thwarted the day after its adoption by the resumption of bombardments by the regime with the active support of its allies, including those within the Council who had subscribed to the truce. Resolution 2401 (2018) has lost none of its relevance, quite the contrary — full and unhindered humanitarian access to help populations in distress must be implemented throughout the territory. It is essential and urgent that humanitarian convoys can reach eastern Ghouta safely and that civilians fleeing hostilities or in need of medical treatment can be protected.Finally, we can only sustainably resolve the Syrian crisis within the framework of a political solution and on the basis of the full implementation of resolution 2254 (2015). Only under those conditions can put an end to the suffering of the Syrian people, eradicate terrorism and work together for the stability of the Middle East. We have been calling for a political solution for seven years. May those who join us today in their concern about the consequences of the Syrian crisis finally force the regime to accept negotiations under the aegis of the United Nations.We cannot allow the most fundamental values and standards of humanity, such as those emanating from the Charter of the United Nations, be thwarted and flouted in front of our eyes without reacting. Those values and standards must be defended and protected. That is the reason behind our commitment — to restore the complete ban on chemical weapons set in stone within international conventions, and thereby consolidate the rule of law. It is the responsibility of those who believe, like France, in effective multilateralism led by a respected United Nations.We must stop the Syrian chemical escalation. We cannot allow a country to simultaneously defy the Council and international law. The ability of Damascus to violate all our norms constitutes a threat to international security. Let us put an end to it.S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 10/22 18-10728 Ms. Pierce (United Kingdom): The Secretary-General has presented a catalogue of danger in the Middle East, including Gaza, Yemen and Iraq. It is no disrespect to those issues that today, like other speakers, I will concentrate on Syria. The United Kingdom will be ready to put its shoulder to the wheel on those other issues when the time comes.The situation we face today and the reason we are in the Security Council today arise wholly and solely from the use of chemical weapons on the Syrian people, most probably by the Syrian regime — not just once, but consistently and persistently over the past five years. The highest degree of responsibility, to quote the Russian Ambassador, is indeed what the Council, and in particular its five permanent members, are for, and it is our duty to uphold.The British Cabinet met recently and concluded that the Al-Assad regime has a track record of the use of chemical weapons and that it is highly likely the regime is responsible for Saturday's attack. This is a further example of the erosion of international law in relation to the use of chemical weapons, as my French and American colleagues have set out, and it is deeply concerning. But more important than that, the use of chemical weapons cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. The British Cabinet has agreed on the need to take action to alleviate humanitarian distress and to deter the further use of chemical weapons by the Al-Assad regime. To that end, we will continue to work with our friends and allies to coordinate an international response.The Secretary-General mentioned the Cold War. Of course, the Cold War was bracketed by East-West cooperation. We have been on the same side as Russia. In April 1945, Russia liberated Vienna as part of our joint efforts to bring peace to Europe. In 1995, it passed the Dayton Accords at part of our joint efforts to bring peace and stability to Bosnia and Herzegovina. But in 2018 the Russians refuse to work with us to bring peace to Syria.Instead, since the first attack on Ghouta and chemical-weapons use, in 2013, the Joint Investigative Mechanism has ascribed two uses of mustard gas to Da'esh, three uses of chlorine to the Syrian regime and one use of sarin to the Syrian regime before the latest attack. As my French colleague has set out, the United Kingdom, the United States and France are members in good standing of the Chemical Weapons Convention. We are members and supporters of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and its Fact-finding Mission. In the debates in the Security Council earlier this week, we would have dispatched an investigative mission, had Russia and Bolivia not blocked that effort (see S/PV.8228).Syria is the latest pernicious chronology of Russia's disregard for international law and disrespect for the international institutions we have built together to keep us collectively safe. This is revealed in actions over Georgia 10 years ago, over Malaysia Airlines Flight MH-17 and over the attack in Salisbury, which we will return to next week.Let me repeat what I said in the Security Council last week. My Government and the British people are not Russophobic. We have no quarrel with the Russian people. We respect Russia as a country. We prefer a productive relationship with Russia, but it is Russia's own actions that have led to this situation.What has taken place in Syria to date is in itself a violation of the United Nations Charter. No purpose or principle of the Charter is upheld or served by the use of chemical weapons on innocent civilians. On the contrary: to stand by and ignore the requirements of justice, accountability and the preservation of the non-proliferation regime is to place all our security — not just that of the Syrian people — at the mercy of a Russian veto. We will not sacrifice the international order we have collectively built to the Russian desire to protect its ally at all costs.The Russian Ambassador set out what Russia is doing on the ground in Syria. He thought that might be inconvenient for me to hear. However, it is not inconvenient for me to point out that Russia has given $5.5 million to the United Nations appeal. The United Kingdom has given a $160 million, and this is part of a contribution totalling $3.5 billion in all. It is not inconvenient for me to say that; it may be inconvenient for the Russian Ambassador to hear it.The Russian Ambassador also asked why we were not joining in and trying to stabilize actions in Syria and bring about peace. We have tried. Indeed, we have tried very hard to support Staffan de Mistura in getting the Geneva political process under way, and we shall continue to so. But we do not join Russia, because, sadly, its efforts have not been to try and restart the Geneva process. Instead, their efforts have been to support Syria in the use of chemical weapons and the 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 11/22 bombardment of the Syrian people. In the area known as T-4, they helped the regime liberate this area but they took their eye off the ball and Da'esh took it back. They took it again, but, sadly, foreign fighters have been able to re-establish themselves there. This is not de-escalation. This is not political progress. This is a gross distortion by Russia of what is actually happening on the ground.The circumstances that we face today are truly exceptional. My colleagues from the United States and France have set out in great detail the catalogue of awful things that are happening to the Syrian people. That catalogue goes to the heart of what the Geneva Conventions, the non-proliferation regime, the United Nations and the Security Council are for. It is not only dangerous what Russia is doing in vetoing our resolutions and in supporting the Syrian regime's actions against its own people. It is ultimately prejudicial to our security. Indeed, it will let Da'esh re-establish itself. It is something that we believe we need to take action to defend.Mr. Skoog (Sweden): I thank the Secretary-General for his briefing today, for his efforts and for his good offices.Last weekend, reports once again began to emerge of horrifying allegations of the use of chemical weapons in Syria, this time in Douma, with reports of a large number of civilian casualties. Like many others, we were alarmed by these extremely serious allegations, and we called for an immediate, impartial and thorough investigation to establish the facts. In that regard, we welcome the fact that the Fact-finding Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which we fully support, has been deployed to Syria. Full access and cooperation by all parties must now be ensured.I want to reiterate once more that Sweden will spare no effort to combat the use and proliferation of chemical weapons by State or non-State actors anywhere in the world. We unequivocally condemn in the strongest terms the use of chemical weapons, including in Syria. It is a serious violation of international law, it constitutes a threat to international peace and security, and their use in armed conflict is a war crime. The international disarmament and non-proliferation regime must be safeguarded, which is best achieved through true multilateralism and broad international consensus.We share the outrage and the frustration of many in this Chamber about chemical-weapons use in Syria. Those responsible for such crimes must be held accountable. We cannot accept impunity.The conflict in Syria is in its eighth year, and we are at a dangerous moment. We fully share the deep concern expressed by the Secretary-General about the risks of the current impasse and the need to avoid the situation escalating and spiralling out of control and to pay further attention to the divides, tensions and fault lines in the region, as described again by the Secretary-General this morning.We remain deeply disappointed that the Security Council has been unable to agree and move forward on a substantial, swift, and unified response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria. We deeply regret that Russia once again used its veto and blocked the Council from taking action this week (see S/PV.8228). Over the past few days, we have tried to ensure that all peaceful means to respond have seriously been considered. We are working tirelessly to ensure that no stone is left unturned in efforts to find a way forward in the Security Council. The Secretary-General offered to support such efforts through his good offices, which is an opportunity that should be seized. That is why yesterday we circulated yet another proposal that asks for four things.First, it condemns in the strongest terms any use of chemical weapons in Syria and expresses alarm at the alleged incident in Douma last weekend, because the use of chemical weapons constitutes a serious violation of international law.Secondly, it demands full access and cooperation for the OPCW Fact-finding Mission, because we need facts and evidence about what happened in Douma last weekend.Thirdly, it expresses the Council's determination to establish a new impartial, objective and independent attribution mechanism based on a proposal by the Secretary-General, because the perpetrators of chemical-weapons attacks must be identified and held to account, and, to that end, we need a new mechanism.Fourthly, it requests the Secretary-General to dispatch immediately a high-level disarmament mission to Syria because we need to resolve all outstanding issues on chemical weapons and rid Syria once and for all possible chemical weapons that might still exist in S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 12/22 18-10728 the country. Such a mission would add political and diplomatic leverage to the necessary technical and professional work of the OPCW. We therefore call on all members of the Council to muster the political will and respond to the appeal by the Secretary-General so as to come together and move forward.The use of chemical weapons is a grave threat to international peace and security. It is indeed deplorable that the Council has not yet been able to come together and agree on a timely and firm response. Even though the use of chemical weapons in itself violates international law, any response must comply with international law and respect the Charter of the United Nations. The time has now come to urgently revert to a political process under United Nations auspices for a political solution in line with resolution 2254 (2015), and for Syria and the Astana guarantors to move forward without further delay and live up to their commitments so that resolution 2401 (2018), which demands the cessation of hostilities and humanitarian access, can be fully and urgently implemented. That is the only way to end to the suffering of the Syrian people and end the brutal seven-year-long conflict.We firmly believe that there is a way for the Council to shoulder its responsibilities under the Charter. We believe that there continues to be a way for the Council to come together. We believe that we need to ensure that we have exhausted every peaceful effort and every diplomatic option to stop further atrocities from being carried out in Syria, hold those responsible to account, come to terms once with the chemical-weapons issue in Syria, cease hostilities and find a political solution.Mr. Ndong Mba (Equatorial Guinea) (spoke in Spanish): First of all, on behalf of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea, I thank Secretary-General António Guterres for having illustrated for us the chaotic and dangerous situation currently prevailing in the Middle East by providing a detailed overview of every one of the conflicts in that vulnerable region, from Libya to the desolate and devastating crisis in Syria, which, as all evidence suggests, runs the imminent risk of dramatically deteriorating.In line with the statement of the Secretary-General, we reaffirm Equatorial Guinea's firm belief that in confronting such situations we must always have recourse to dialogue and establish and respect mechanisms intended for achieving the peaceful settlement of conflicts until such options are exhausted. A unilateral military response could be counterproductive, and, far from solving the problem, it would lead to more suffering and chaos than already present, as the Secretary-General indicated — and additional disorder as in case of Libya, with which we are well familiar in Africa, and the consequences of which affect the entire Sahel region and part of Central Africa. We stand categorically against the use of force with the sole exception that it be justified under the conditions set forth under the Charter of the United Nations Charter and that it be used as a last resort after all other means have been exhausted.We are concerned about the rhetoric that is being used. It sounds dangerously familiar to us, and we do not like where it might lead us. We appeal to Governments' sense of responsibility, and in particular to the permanent members of the Security Council, as we believe that they have the additional responsibility of defending the relevance of the Council.We would like to ask the following questions. Who benefits from the inability of the Security Council to make decisions? Are we contributing to delegitimizing the Council? Are we actively eroding the Council's relevance in the international political arena? If the Council is unable to take action, how long will it take before the international community withdraws its faith, hope and trust in the Council?There is no military solution to the Syrian issue. We must therefore continue to look for ways to solve the problem through diplomatic channels. All Council members must act responsibly and agree to establish an independent and impartial monitoring mechanism to ascertain what took place in Douma and ensure accountability and that the perpetrators are brought to justice.The Secretary-General stated his disappointment with the Council's failure to establish a mechanism that would identify and attribute responsibility to those using chemical weapons. We could not agree more with that statement. Only a few days ago, our delegation stated its frustration when the Council failed to adopt three draft resolution put to the vote (see S/PV.8228). The Secretary-General's offer concerning his good offices must be considered, and we must provide him with that opportunity.In conclusion, we reiterate the position of Equatorial Guinea in arguing against and condemning 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 13/22 the use of chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction regardless of who uses them.Mr. Llorentty Solíz (Plurinational State of Bolivia) (spoke in Spanish): I thank you, Sir, for having convened this meeting. We welcome the presence of the Secretary-General among us. His assessments are always very precise and useful, and we thank him for the intensive work that he is doing for the benefit of upholding the purposes and principles of the Organization.For some reason, some members of the Security Council are avoiding addressing the main reason for convening this meeting, which is that one State Member has threatened the unilateral use of force in violation of the Charter of the United Nations. Much has been said about the use of chemical weapons, and Bolivia would like to make clear its total and absolute condemnation of the use of chemical weapons or the use of chemical agents as weapons as unjustifiable and criminal acts wherever, whenever and by whomever they are committed. For their use is a grave crime under international law and against the interests of international peace and security. Those responsible for committing those terrible and criminal acts must be identified, investigated, prosecuted and punished. We demand a transparent and impartial investigation that must identify those responsible for any act of the use of chemical weapons.Needless to say, it is essential that the Security Council ensures an independent, impartial, complete, conclusive and, above all, depoliticized investigation. We regret that the Security Council has as yet failed to achieve that objective. Nonetheless, we will support all work intended to accomplish that goal. It is crucial that the Council continue to discuss the issue of the use of chemical weapons, but I reiterate that what has brought us together at this meeting is the threat of one State Member' illegal use of force.Over the past 72 years, humankind has built a framework that is not only physical or institutional, but also juridical. Humankind has setup instruments of international law intended precisely to prevent the most powerful from attacking the weakest with impunity so as to establish a balance in the world and prevent grave violations to international peace and security. We have built an international system — the Security Council is clear evidence of it — based on rules. It is the duty of the Council and of all the organs of the United Nations to respect those rules and defend multilateralism. The Charter of the United Nations, which prohibits unilateral action, must be upheld.Another key detail to remember is that the Security Council is not representative of the five permanent members it comprises, nor of its 15 members seated around this table; rather, it represents the entire membership of 193 States, both the nations and their peoples. The Security Council must not be utilized as a sounding board for war propaganda nor interventionism. It should also not be made into a pawn to be sacrificed on the chessboard of war, geopolitics and petty interests.We have heard many stories from history about the prohibition of chemical weapons, and Bolivia is an active participant in that system, but I would like to talk about the story of our Charter. When one is unsure about how to act under certain circumstances, I read that the best way to settle such uncertainty is to recall the principles of the French Revolution and reflect on where the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity are upheld. Those principles form part of the genesis of the Charter. Another part comes from the Magna Carta, of course, which, for the first time in history, limited the exercise of power precisely to defend the weakest.Another antecedent to the Charter is the Yalta Conference. I read that the Conference established the system of control and checks and balances, which is the Security Council with its five permanent members. Bolivia did not attend the Conference. As I understand it, just Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin were present. The outcome of the Conference was ratified at the San Francisco Conference a few months later in 1945. That is the system that we have agreed to uphold, which is why I believe that is essential to understand the principles of our Charter. Our Charter is not words on page, meant to hand out to tourists visiting the United Nations Headquarters, but rather a set of norms that we have agreed to comply with and uphold. Article 2 states that"The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles."Principle 4 of Article 2 reads,"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 14/22 18-10728 any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."That is to say that any use of force must be authorized by the Security Council, in accordance with the Charter. Any form of unilateral action therefore contravenes international law and the purposes and principles of the Charter.Another point worth mentioning is that we have listened, with due respect, to our colleagues speak about the criminal use of chemical weapons, and we completely agree with them on that. However, it would be very dangerous to fight an alleged violation of international law with another violation of international law and the Charter. That is why, in this specific case, we hope that there is an independent, impartial, comprehensive and conclusive investigation.Allow me to offer a clarification to my dear colleague from the United Kingdom. While Bolivia voted against one draft resolution, it voted in favour of two others. It voted against the one because, regrettably, this platform was being exploited for political motives. Draft resolutions are presented for nothing more than the spectacle of it, for the television cameras. Draft resolutions are presented knowing that they will be vetoed, and not all efforts are put forth to reach consensus, though that is what we normally do for resolutions.We believe that this meeting is very important because we not only discussing an attack on a Member State, or the threat of a military strike against a Member State of the United Nations, whichever it may be, but rather because we are living at a time of constant attacks on multilateralism. Let us recall that the achievements in the Paris Agreement on Climate Change have been undermined. Let us recall that the gains reached with the Global Compact for Migration have been eroded. Let us recall that there is a clear policy and mindset of multilateralism subversion. What happens is that for some the discourse on human rights is used until it no longer serves their interests, and then they violate those rights.My region is a witness to that. We endured Operation Condor, as it was called, during the 1970s, which was planned by the intelligence services of some Member States. When democracy did not suit them, they financed coups d'etat. When they were unhappy with the discourse on human rights, they infringed human rights. When the discourse of democracy was no longer enough, they were ready to finance coups d'etat. The use of unilateral practices leaves behind unhealed wounds, despite the passage of time.Some of the members of the Council have spoken on the situation in Iraq and Libya, which I believe are some of the worst crimes that have been committed this century. The invasion of Iraq, with its dire consequences, left more than 1 million dead. The effects of the strikes against Libya and the regime-change policies imposed on it, which, as my colleague from Equatorial Guinea aptly said, they still feel, suffer and endure throughout the entire region of the Sahel and Central Africa. But no one wants to talk about the root causes of those conflicts, and no one will talk about the impunity enjoyed for those serious crimes. It warrants repeating. Those are the most serious crimes committed this century. We hope that all the members of the Security Council, given the high degree of responsibility we have — 10 of us elected by the membership and five enjoy the privilege to have a permanent seat on the Council with the power of veto — must lead by example for the rest of the membership on the fulfilment of the purposes and principles of the Charter.By way of conclusion, I would like to reiterate what former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in a similar situation in 2013: "The Security Council has the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security". That is my appeal. Everything must be addressed within the framework of the Charter. The use of force is legal only in the exercise of the right to self-defence, in line with Article 51 of the Charter, or when the Security Council approves such action. That was the reason for the meeting, and Bolivia's position is to categorically condemn any threat or use of unilateral force.Mr. Alotaibi (Kuwait) (spoke in Arabic): At the outset, I would very much like to thank the Secretary-General for his valuable briefing today. We share his concern about the fact that the Middle East is experiencing crises and challenges that unquestionably represent threats to international peace and security. The situation will undoubtedly deteriorate if the Security Council resolutions are not implemented by the relevant parties.The question of Palestine, the practices of the Israeli occupation there and its continued violations of international humanitarian law, international human rights law and the relevant Security Council resolutions 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 15/22 are testament to that. The most recent is its repression of peaceful protests in Gaza and the use of excessive force. That led to the deaths of dozens of civilians and injuries to hundreds as they exercised their legitimate right to demonstrate peacefully in support of the March of Return. Kuwait condemns those Israeli practices in the strongest terms. We regret that the Security Council has not taken action to condemn such acts of repression or to call on the Israeli occupation forces to end them. The Israeli occupying Power should not be an exception. Everyone should respect and abide by international law and the Charter of the United Nations and should implement the relevant Security Council resolutions with the aim of achieving a just, comprehensive and lasting peace that can fulfil the Palestinian people's legitimate political right to establish their own State on their own land, with East Jerusalem as its capital.We have had a number of meetings over the past few days. Today's meeting would not have taken place if we had been able to agree on a new mechanism to investigate the allegations of the use of chemical weapons in Syria. This disagreement has led to deep divisions among the members of the Security Council. We must step up our efforts to advance the stalled political process in Syria. We have been concerned about escalating tensions among all parties since the beginning of the year. Through the adoption of resolution 2401 (2018), which primarily calls for a cessation of hostilities throughout Syria for at least 30 days, we tried to improve the humanitarian situation. Unfortunately, however, it has not been implemented and has in fact been violated in flagrant disregard for the will of the international community.We share the concern and disappointment of the Secretary-General about the deteriorating situation in Syria and the ongoing allegations of the use of chemical weapons, and support his call for an agreement on a new mechanism to ensure accountability and end impunity in Syria. We reiterate our support for the efforts of the Fact-finding Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons to establish the facts surrounding the alleged use of chemical weapons in Douma, in eastern Ghouta, and emphasize that there must be accountability for the perpetrators of those crimes, if they are confirmed.In view of our responsibility as members of the Council, we should do our utmost and not lose hope, and we should continue our efforts to agree on the establishment of an independent, impartial and professional mechanism for attributing responsibility and ensuring accountability. The continued violations of international humanitarian law, international human rights law and the relevant Security Council resolutions, including resolution 2118 (2013), by the warring parties in Syria further convince us that, in the case of grave violations of human rights or crimes that amount to war crimes or crimes against humanity, there should be a moratorium on the use of the veto as a procedural matter, so that such tragedies for innocent civilians are not repeated.The State of Kuwait takes a principled and firm position, in line with that of the League of Arab States. We call for preserving the unity, sovereignty and independence of Syria, as well as for a cessation of the violence and hostilities in order to put an end to bloodshed, protect the Syrian people and achieve a peaceful settlement. This would be done under the auspices of the United Nations and through the efforts of the Secretary-General's Special Envoy to Syria, based on the Geneva communiqué of 2012 (S/2012/522, annex) and resolution 2254 (2015), with the aim of achieving a political transition agreed on by all sectors of Syrian society and of meeting their legitimate aspirations.Mr. Umarov (Kazakhstan): We join others in expressing our appreciation to the Secretary-General for his insightful briefing and personal presence at today's meeting. In our view, since his appointment as steward of this world Organization, he has ceaselessly promoted a very important approach, which is the use of amicable and preventive diplomacy.Following an alert to the world, the Security Council underlined in its first presidential statement of 2018, on preventive diplomacy and sustaining peace (S/PRST/2018/1), adopted during Kazakhstan's presidency of the Security Council, that the ways to address conflict may include measures to rebuild trust by bringing Member States together around common goals. That has been particularly important in situations where international relations have featured confrontations and tension behind which the contours of a global war are increasingly apparent. We are right now in a moment when we must exercise special caution and vigilance in making decisions about our actions, especially in the Middle East. We believe that it is time to tap into all the tools available for a comprehensive strategy of preventive diplomacy in order to avoid the very serious consequences of any S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 16/22 18-10728 military action that could have repercussions for global security and stability.The recent escalation of the rhetoric on Syria and the threat of the use of unilateral actions has left the delegation of Kazakhstan deeply concerned about the unfolding situation, which has the potential to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security. We all bear a responsibility for complying with international law and order, and none of our countries has the right to violate the Charter of the United Nations or to act or threaten to act unilaterally with respect to a sovereign nation under any pretext, unless that is decided by the Security Council. The Security Council is a collective body and is designed to take balanced decisions with regard to the issues of peace and security. We can agree or disagree, but we are mandated to work together to achieve a decision for which we have to bear a collective responsibility.Kazakhstan believes that the most effective way to prevent conflicts is to use diplomacy and mediation, not military means. We look forward to the next round of talks to be held in Geneva and in our capital, Astana, when the parties will address the stepping up of efforts to ensure observance of their respective agreements, among other issues.In addressing the disputes over the issue of the alleged use of chemical weapons in Douma in Syria, which has provoked the most recent tension in international relations, we consider it necessary to state the following. Kazakhstan strongly condemns any use of chemical weapons, if confirmed. Impunity is not permissible. We should act resolutely to stop any further use of such inhuman weapons, but we should act on the basis of proven facts. In this particular case, where there are doubts about the actual use of a poisonous substance, Kazakhstan calls on the members of the Council to be patient, at least until the expert group of the Fact-finding Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to Syria is deployed to the site of the alleged attack and can report on the findings of its investigation, particularly given that yesterday we learned that the Syrian Government has granted visas for the OPCW investigators and pledged to facilitate access to the sites of the alleged chemical attack. We should first establish and understand the scientifically and professionally ascertained facts, after which the Council should decide on the appropriate line of action to take.At this stage, any military action or threat of it without the prior approval of the Security Council is undesirable. It could have a long-lasting negative impact that would be very difficult to overcome and could result in unprecedented and unanticipated complications. Kazakhstan remains committed to the Charter of the United Nations and to all Security Council resolutions aimed at resolving the political and humanitarian aspects of the Syrian conflict. We believe it is crucial to exercise restraint and refrain from any rhetoric that might exacerbate the already fragile and volatile situation. Such a pause for reflection on the consequences is essential to preserving international peace and security.In the light of the prevailing circumstances, it is more critical than ever that all Council members implement resolution 2401 (2018). The crisis in Syria can be resolved only through an inclusive and Syrian-led political process, based on the Geneva communiqué of 30 June 2012 (S/2012/522, annex), subsequent Security Council resolutions and the relevant statements of the International Syria Support Group. Lastly, we fully endorse the views articulated by the Secretary-General on 11 April about the risks of the current impasse that we are witnessing today (see SG/SM/18984). We must at all costs avoid the situation spiralling out of control. Our ultimate goal should be to put an end to the horrific suffering of the Syrian people and to help them to move forward on a path of peace and progress.Once again, this is an alarming moment, and we need to work together to restore unity and effectiveness in the Security Council by rebuilding trust and consensus in order to preserve global peace and security. We need cooperation within the Council to establish a workable attribution mechanism, which we passionately advocated today in this Chamber. Let us make it happen and transform our words into real deeds. The delegation of Kazakhstan is ready for that and calls on its colleagues to go the extra mile in that direction.Mr. Alemu (Ethiopia): We thank the Secretary-General for his briefing and deeply appreciate his efforts to weigh in on the grave challenge that we are facing, in order to ensure that what should and must be avoided will not happen because of miscalculation or a lack of thoughtfulness or of appreciation for the tremendous responsibility that the Security Council, especially its permanent members, bears. The Cold War is back with a vengeance, the Secretary-General said, but this time, he went on to tell us, in a less managed 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 17/22 manner. It is difficult to quarrel with him. His approach was quite comprehensive, focusing, as he said, on the multiplicity of dangerous conflicts that the Middle East is facing. While his approach may be better, I choose to focus on Syria because it is the current flashpoint.Following the alleged chemical attacks in Douma, it is regrettable that the Council was not able to adopt a resolution to create an independent, impartial and professional investigative mechanism for identifying those responsible for the use of chemical weapons in Syria. This is a problem that has been with us for some time and a reality that sadly reflects the lack of unity in the Council even on matters that are manifestly in the common interest of all. We certainly welcome the deployment of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Fact-finding Mission to Syria to establish the facts surrounding the alleged use of chemicals as weapons. We have repeatedly stated that using chemicals as weapons is inhumane, and we condemn their use by any actor under any circumstances. One matter remains, and that is establishing a mechanism for attribution. We hope that will be done as soon as possible, but that does not mean that in the meantime we should cease to exercise maximum restraint in the interests of peace.Right now, pragmatic considerations and simple rational calculation suggest that we must get our priorities right. We need to continue to live if we are to be able to fight evil. We have continued to express our deep concern about the current dynamics in Syria and their devastating implications for regional and international peace and security. We fully concur with the Secretary-General, who stressed in his statement of 11 April that it is vital to ensure that the situation does not spiral out of control (see SG/SM/18984). He stressed that legitimate concern again today. The Security Council, as the principal body responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, should not and cannot allow that to happen. At a time when we are talking about preventive diplomacy — as well as after appointing a Secretary-General who told us, in his maiden speech to the Council (see S/PV.7857), that prevention is not merely a priority, but the priority — now is the time for the United Nations to undertake the search for diplomacy for peace in earnest. If we are seriously committed to moving our Organization from a culture of reaction to one of prevention, now is the time to stand firm, speak with one voice and take proactive and collective action that can be respected by all major stakeholders.That requires the Council to be united for global peace and security. We know that is difficult, but we believe that we have no other sane option. This is the time for the Security Council to stand up and be counted. The Security Council is the custodian of the Charter of the United Nations, which, growing out of the devastation of the Second World War, promised to save succeeding generations from that scourge. That is a clarion call the Council should heed and act on. The situation should not be allowed to spiral out of control. The Secretary-General is right and the Council should listen to him.Mr. Van Oosterom (Netherlands): We thank the Secretary-General for his comprehensive and insightful briefing. His statement rightly focused on the broader Middle East. However, I will focus on the most pressing issue at hand, the use of chemical weapons in Syria.The Charter of the United Nations starts with the words "We the peoples of the United Nations", and while the Russian Federation is blocking the Council from taking effective action on the crimes of Russia's ally Syria, all peoples of every nation are outraged by the continued unrestrained violence that the Syrian regime has unleashed against its own people. As the Secretary-General just said, the people of Syria have lived through a litany of horrors. No responsible Government can ignore the universal outrage that those horrors have provoked.Our collective incapacity in the Council to stop the crimes in Syria should weigh heavily on the conscience of all our members, but on the conscience of one permanent member in particular. It was our collective conscience that created the Charter of the United Nations. It was our collective conscience that created the Chemical Weapons Convention. The use of chemical weapons is unlawful in and of itself. It is a violation of the Charter of the United Nations. It is a serious violation of international law and may constitute a war crime and a crime against humanity.We strongly believe that the international community must fully uphold the standard that the use of chemical weapons is never permissible. As the Secretary-General just said, the norm against the use of chemical weapons must be upheld. The non-proliferation regime must be upheld. Accountability for the use of chemical weapons in Syria is therefore neither optional S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 18/22 18-10728 nor negotiable. The images of last weekend's attack in Douma are appalling. Atrocities have once again been inflicted on Syria's civilian population. Once again, dozens of innocent civilians have been killed and hundreds injured. The Kingdom of the Netherlands believes that it is highly likely that the Syrian regime is responsible for the attack. It has a proven history of such attacks, having used chemicals as a weapon against its own people in 2014, 2015 and 2017. It is unacceptable that four years after Syria joined the Chemical Weapons Convention, its declarations can still not be verified as accurate or complete.The Kingdom of the Netherlands is a long-time supporter of fighting impunity when it comes to chemical weapons. Regrettably, all attempts to achieve accountability in the Council have failed. Referral to the International Criminal Court was vetoed. The renewal of the mandate of the Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) was also vetoed. This week, accountability was again vetoed. With its vetoes, the Russian Federation has assumed much responsibility for the crimes committed by the Syrian regime. The draft resolution for a new accountability mechanism that was vetoed this week remains the bare minimum of what is acceptable to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. We will not settle for anything less than an independent, impartial attribution mechanism that can ensure that the culprits of that vicious attack will be identified and held accountable.No veto can wipe from our memory the clear findings presented by the JIM on the use of chemical weapons by the Al-Assad regime and Da'esh. No veto can stop our compassion for the victims of the chemical-weapon attack last weekend. No veto can end our determination to achieve justice for the victims and for the people of Syria as a whole.In conclusion, the Kingdom of the Netherlands remains committed to fighting impunity. We reiterate our strong support for an international, impartial and independent mechanism, the Commission of Inquiry, the International Partnership against Impunity for the Use of Chemical Weapons and a referral of the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, as the most appropriate path to accountability and justice. At the heart of our policy on Syria is a deep desire for peace and justice for its people. Impunity cannot and will not prevail.Let me end with warm words of appreciation to the Secretary-General and his tireless efforts for justice and the international legal order.Ms. Wronecka (Poland): I would like to thank the Secretary-General for his comprehensive briefing and to assure him of our full support in finding a political solution to all conflicts, not just the one in Syria.Since we are discussing the situation in the Middle East and in particular the current situation in Syria, let me begin with a very sad observation. Even with our unanimously adopted resolutions, such as resolution 2401 (2018), we are still not seeing any substantial change on the ground. The fighting is far from being over and the human suffering is tremendous. Taking into consideration the current situation and the growing risk of the loss of human life owing simply to a lack of food or medicine, we should try to do our utmost to find possible ways to ensure that life-saving aid convoys can reach those in need. Unfortunately, that applies not only to eastern Ghouta but also to Idlib and Aleppo provinces. We must find a way to alleviate the suffering of ordinary Syrians. The civilian population in Syria has already suffered too much.International public opinion is watching our meetings and sees our lack of agreement on the most basic principles under international humanitarian law. The Council bears enormous responsibility and will be held accountable for its actions. We therefore call on the Council to take the necessary steps to ensure that all the parties to the conflict, especially the regime and its allies, implement the ceasefire, enable humanitarian access and medical evacuations and fully engage in the United Nations-led talks in Geneva, in line with resolution 2254 (2015) and the 2012 Geneva communiqué (S/2012/522, annex), which represent the best path to peace.With regard to the issue of chemical weapons, a century ago that was a normal way to wage war. Just recently we commemorated the hundredth anniversary of the first use of chemical weapons, on the Western and Eastern fronts of the First World War alike. French, British, American and other Allied soldiers were targeted with chlorine in Ypres, while Russian soldiers were dying from the same gruesome weapons in Bolimów, now part of Polish territory. Now, a century later, we are being challenged by these ghastly weapons yet again. Our nations are seeing the effects of the same 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 19/22 toxic gas through the images of civilians who sought refuge in basements in Ghouta and other areas in Syria.Chemical weapons were banned when the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) cam into effect in 1997. We had begun a new chapter in the history of non-proliferation and disarmament. All of us in this Chamber agree that the use of chemical weapons by anyone, anywhere is deplorable and unacceptable. Can we really allow the success story of the CWC to be reversed? Will the Security Council allow the vision of a world free of chemical weapons to be destroyed? It is regrettable that the establishment of an independent, impartial investigative mechanism on the use of chemical weapons in Syria was vetoed on Tuesday (see S/PV.8228), thereby enabling those responsible for chemical attacks to remain unpunished. Accountability for such acts is a requirement under international law and is central to achieving durable peace in Syria. As members of the Security Council, we must find a way to reach agreement on how to properly respond to chemical attacks in Syria. We hope to see the Fact-finding Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) deployed to Douma as soon as possible. We reiterate our appreciation to the Director-General and staff of the OPCW for their commitment to its goals and work, often in particularly challenging circumstances.Mr. Tanoh-Boutchoue (Côte d'Ivoire) (spoke in French): The delegation of Côte d'Ivoire thanks Secretary-General António Guterres for his briefing on new developments in the critical situation in several countries in the Middle East, in particular Syria, since the Security Council considered the issue on 9 and 10 April (see S/PV. 8225 and S/PV. 8228).Despite the relative lull in the fighting in Syria, the humanitarian situation remains troubling in the light of the allegations of the recurring use of chemical weapons by parties to the conflict. As a result of its internal divisions, despite our goodwill, the Council has failed to ensure the implementation of resolution 2401 (2018), which we adopted unanimously in order to deliver humanitarian assistance to people in need. In the light of the continuing reports of the use of chemical weapons in Douma, the Council was unable to reach an agreement on a statement that at the very least would have conveyed our solidarity to the Syrian people at this difficult time. The delegation of Côte d'Ivoire remains concerned by the current impasse in the Security Council, which has, unfortunately, prevented it from reaching agreement on a mechanism to combat impunity vis-à-vis the use of chemical weapons in Syria.In this context, we reiterate our support for the impartial, transparent, independent investigation to be conducted by the Fact-finding Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons with the aim of shedding light on allegations of the use of chemical weapons in Douma, in eastern Ghouta.Côte d'Ivoire reiterates its strong condemnation of any use of chemical weapons, by any party, during peacetime or during wartime. Once again we beseech members of the Council to unite so as to set aside their differences and successfully set up an accountability mechanism to ensure that those who use chemical weapons are held accountable.We remain alarmed by the tensions stemming from the current political impasse, and we encourage the Secretary-General to make use of his good offices with stakeholders to restore peace and calm, in order to prevent any further escalation of the situation. To that end, my country invites all parties to exercise restraint so as to peacefully resolve this issue and in so doing safeguard international peace and security, which is our shared legacy.Côte d'Ivoire reaffirms our conviction and our principled position that there can be no military response to the crisis in Syria. The solution needs to be sought through dialogue and an inclusive political process, as stipulated in the road map set out by resolution 2254 (2015). My country remains convinced that dialogue alone will lead us to an equitable settlement of the conflict in Syria.The President (spoke in Spanish): I shall now make statement in my capacity as the representative of Peru.We would like to express our gratitude for the briefing by Secretary-General António Guterres and to thank him for his willingness to help to achieve a solution to the impasse in which the Security Council currently finds itself. We encourage him to continue to spare no effort in this respect, in line with the prerogatives conferred upon him by the Charter of the United Nations.Peru expresses its deep-rooted concern at the divisions that have emerged in the Council, in particular between its permanent members, and at the regrettable use of the veto, which limits our capacity to maintain S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 20/22 18-10728 international peace and security and to resolve the humanitarian conflicts and crises that form our agenda.We note with alarm the fact that the conflict in Syria continues to involve atrocity crimes committed with impunity and that it has deteriorated into a serious threat to regional and global stability, to the point where it is giving rise to serious tensions.With respect to reports of the further use of chemical weapons in Douma, we believe it necessary to resume, as a matter of urgency and in a renewed spirit of compromise, negotiations that will lead to ensuring full access, as required, for the Fact-finding Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which is being deployed in Syria to determine what happened; and to create a dedicated, independent, objective and impartial mechanism to attribute responsibility.On that understanding, we believe it important to recall once again that there can be no military solution to the Syrian conflict and that any response to the barbaric events taking place in that country must be in keeping with the norms of international law and the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.We recall also that in its resolution 2401 (2018), the Council ordered a humanitarian ceasefire throughout the entire Syrian territory, and that it is urgent to make headway in the political process in line with resolution 2254 (2015) and the Geneva communiqué (S/2012/522, annex). As the Secretary-General himself said, of particular concern is the potential threat posed by the current deadlock. We must at all costs prevent the situation from spiralling out of control. This must not occur given that our duty is to put an end to the suffering of millions of people and to impunity for atrocity crimes.Peru reiterates its commitment to living up to the lofty responsibility that the maintenance of international peace and security entails. My delegation will continue to work towards a solution to the conflict and protect the Syrian people, in keeping with the Charter of the United Nations and international law.I now resume my functions as President of the Council.I would like to recall the statement by the President of the Security Council contained in document S/2017/507, on the length of interventions.Mr. Ja'afari (Syrian Arab Republic) (spoke in Arabic): First, I should like, on behalf of my Government, to express our condolences to the people and the Government of Algeria in connection with the tragic military plane crash that claimed the lives of 247 passengers.Secondly, I welcome the participation of the Secretary-General in this very important meeting. I thank him for his comprehensive and accurate briefing, which made clear that he and others in the Council did in fact understand this meeting's agenda item. He spoke in a manner commensurate with the threats to international peace and security posed by the allegations and accusations against my country and its allies.My colleague the Ambassador of Sweden said that the use of chemical weapons is a war crime. This is true. I agree with him, as does my Government. However, I would ask him whether he believes that war in itself is a crime and needs to be stopped and prevented. Perhaps this would be a very good title for a book by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, and perhaps this would make clear to Member States that war in itself is a crime.My colleague the representative of the United States said that the Syrian chemical weapons that killed civilians had been used 50 times; that is what she said. Chemical weapons were used 50 times and killed 200 civilians. Imagine that — the Syrian Government reversed the course of the global terrorist war against my country by killing only 200 civilians after having used chemical weapons 50 times. Are these not the words of amateurs? This is a scenario for DC Comics' Superman series. Is that how the White House strategists think — that a certain Government has used chemical weapons 50 times to kill 200 civilians? How is that logical?My American colleague overlooked one important detail — that her country, on board the MV Cape Ray, destroyed the Syrian chemical stockpiles in the Mediterranean, along with ships from Denmark and Norway. How could it be that the experts in the United States delegation did not tell her that Ms. Sigrid Kaag told the Security Council in June 2014 that there were no more chemical stockpiles in Syria. Could they have simply forgotten all of that?Some believe that the massive western military forces in the eastern Mediterranean are due to a Sufi Western affection for a handful of terrorist yobs in 13/04/2018 Threats to international peace and security S/PV.8231 18-10728 21/22 Douma. By the way, those yobs were chased out to the North, as the Council is aware. They are now on their way to Saudi Arabia and thence to Yemen. They will be recycled and used on other fronts, including Yemen. No, the massive military forces in the Mediterranean do not target that handful of terrorists. They target the State of Syria and its allies. That should be the topic discussed today in this meeting.My colleague the American Ambassador was not horrified that her country used 20 million gallons of Agent Orange in Viet Nam in 1961, killing and injuring 3 million Vietnamese. Four hundred thousand children are born with deformities every year due to the use of Agent Orange at that time. She was not horrified by her country's forces killing thousands of Syrians in Raqqa and thousands of Iraqis in Fallujah and Mosul through the use of white phosphorus, which is a chemical weapon. I ask my colleague, the Ambassador of Sweden: Is that not a war crime?I would like to read a remark of the former Defence Minister of Britain, Mr. Doug Henderson. He spoke of the use by his country and the United States of white phosphorus in Iraq. I would ask my friend the British Ambassador to listen to this. Mr. Henderson said that it was unbelievable that the United Kingdom would occupy a country — meaning Iraq — to look for chemical weapons and at the same time use chemical weapons against that very same country.George Orwell, the well-respected and ethical Western author said: "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act". The truth that needs to be told today is that three permanent members of the Security Council are dragging the entire world once again towards the abyss of war and aggression. They seek to obstruct the Council's work in maintaining international peace and security, which is the main principle agreed upon and endorsed by our founding fathers when they adopted the Charter of the United Nations in San Francisco on 26 June, 1945. Even though my colleague, the Ambassador of Bolivia has already read it out, I would like to once again remind the Council of paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the Charter:"All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations".The truth that needs to be told today is that those three States have a legacy based on fallacies and fabricated narratives in order to launch wars, occupy States, control their resources and change their governing systems. The truth that needs to be told today is that the entire world and the Council stand witnesses to the invasion, occupation and destruction of Iraq based on a United States lie in this very Chamber 14 years ago. They stand witnesses to France's exploitation of the Council to destroy Libya under the pretext of protecting civilians while ending the future of an entire people for the very simple reason that its President at the time, Mr. Sarkozy, wanted a cover up for his financial corruption. This is an ongoing case, of which members are all aware. However, some countries still fall for those lies promoted by those very same States in order to attack my country, Syria.God bless the days when France the policies of Charles de Gaulle in the Council followed and repudiated the aggression of the United States and Britain against Iraq. We yearn for those days. France no longer respects the policies of Charles de Gaulle and is now one of the countries that launch attacks against other countries.The truth that needs to be told today is that the international community has not sought to rein in those who are reckless and undermine international relations, subjecting them to disaster time and again since the establishment of this international Organization. Our biggest fear is that if the international community does not come together to end the abuse of those who are reckless, then the Organization will die in circumstances very similar to that which led to the death of the League of Nations.The truth that needs to be told today is that after the failure of the United States, Britain, France and their proxies in our region to achieve their objectives in Syria through providing all forms of support to the armed terrorist groups, we see them today tweeting and bragging about their nice, new and smart rockets, and defying international legitimacy from the Council Chamber. They dispatch war planes and fleets to achieve what their terrorists have failed to achieve over the past seven years.The truth that needs to be told today is that the Syrian Government liberated hundreds of thousands of civilians in eastern Ghouta from the practices of armed terrorist groups that used them as human shields, held S/PV.8231 Threats to international peace and security 13/04/2018 22/22 18-10728 them hostage for years and prevented any medical or food assistance from reaching them. The terrorist groups used the schools, homes and hospitals of those civilians as military bases to launch attacks on 8 million civilians in Damascus.The truth that needs to be told today is that some reckless people are pushing international relations towards the abyss based on a fake video prepared by the terrorist White Helmets, pursuant to instructions by Western intelligence.The truth that needs to be told today is that the so-called international alliance used its war planes to serve Da'esh in order to block the victory of the Syrian Arab Army and its allies against that terrorist organization. That international alliance made the White Helmets its media division to fabricate and falsify incidents in order to benefit the Al-Qaida terrorist organization.The government of my country took the initiative to invite the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons to dispatch its Fact-finding Mission to visit Syria and the alleged site of the incident in Douma. The Government of my country has provided all the facilitation needed for the team to work in a transparent and accurate manner. The team is supposed to start its work in a few hours. This invitation was issued out of strength, confidence and diplomatic experience, not because we are weak or afraid and giving in to bullying or threats.The Syrian Arab Republic condemns in the strongest terms the Governments of these three States for launching their threats to use power in a flagrant violation of Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations, which identifies the primary purpose of the United Nations as the maintenance of international peace and security and the suppression of acts of aggression and other breaches to peace.With the exception of the United States, Britain and France, we all understand that the Security Council is the organ charged with the maintenance of international peace and security and should stand against attempts to impose the law of the jungle and the rule of the powerful. However, some Member States think that the United Nations is just a private business company that works on the basis of pecuniary interests, market rules and the principle of supply and demand to determine the fate of peoples and States, and that use it as a platform for cheap theatrics and the dissemination of lies. This is the truth that disappoints the hopes and aspirations of the peoples of the world.I am not reinventing the wheel in this Chamber. The history of our relations with those States is filled with agony, pain and bitterness as a result of their very well-known policies of aggression. Another more important and shocking truth that should be told today is that the silence of the majority with respect to those aggressive policies does not constitute collusion with these States, but it does arise from fear of their arrogance and political blackmail, economic pressure and aggressive record. Those States do not blink when they go after anyone who is telling the truth.In conclusion, if those three States — the United States, Britain and France — think they can attack us and undermine our sovereignty and set out to do so, we would have no other choice but to apply Article 51 of the Charter, which gives us the legitimate right to defend ourselves. This is not a threat the way they do; it is a promise. This is a promise. We will not let anyone attack our sovereignty.Why do I say that this is a promise? I say this because a thought commonly ascribed to the great United States leader George Washington, who lived more than 200 years ago comes to mind — the sound that is louder than that of the cannons is the sound of the truth that emanates from the heart of a united nation that wants to live free. We in Syria also have leaders and prominent figures as great as George Washington. They are doing the same thing for Syria — protecting the unity and sovereignty of their country.The meeting rose at 12.25 p.m.

Issue 64.3 of the Review for Religious, 2005. ; lglous Witnessing The Spirit QUARTERLY 64.3 2005: Review for Religious fosters dialogue with God, dialogue with ourselves, and dialogue with one another about the holiness we try to live according to cbarisms of Catholic religious life. As Pope Paul VI said, our way of being church is today the way of dialogue. Review for Religious (ISSN 0034-639X) is published quarterly at Saint Louis University. by the Jesuits of the Missouri Province. Editorial Office: 3601 Lindell Boulevard ¯ St. Louis, Missouri 63108-3393 Telephone: 314-977-7363 ¯ Fax: 314-977-7362 E-Mail: review@slu.edu ¯ ~Veb site: www.reviewforreligious.org Manuscripts, books for review, and correspondence with the editor: Review for Religious ¯ 3601 Lindell Boulevard ¯ St. Louis, MO 63108-3393 Correspondence about the Canonical Counsel department: Elizabeth McDonough OP ¯ Pontifical College Josephinum 7625 North High Street ¯ Columbus, Ohio 43235 POSTMASTER Send address changes to Review for Religious ¯ P.O. Box 6070 ° Duluth, MN 55806. Periodical postage paid at St. Louis, Missouri, and additional mailing offices. See inside back cover for information on subscription rates. ©2005 Review for Religious Permission is herewith granted to copy any material (articles, poems, reviews) contained in this issue of Review for Religious for personal or internal use, or for the personal or internal use of specific library clients within the limits outlined in Sections 107 and/or 108 of the United States Copyright Law. All copies made under this permission must bear notice of the source, date, and copyright owner on the first page. This permission is NOT extended to copying for commercial distribu-tion, advertising, institutional promotion, or for the creation of new collective works or anthologies. Such permission will only be considered on written application to the Editor, Review for Religious. ev'iew for religious Editor Associate Editor Canonical Counsel Scripture Scope Editorial Staff Wetrmaster Adv#ory Board David L. Fleming sJ Philip C. Fischer SJ Elizabeth McDonough OP Eugene Hensell OSB Mary Ann Foppe Tracy Gramm Judy Sharp Clare Boehmer ASC Steve Erspamer SM Kathleen Hughes RSCJ Louis and Angela Menard Bishop Terry Steib SVD Miriam D. Ukeritis CSJ QUARTERLY 64.3 2005 contents 228 prisms Prisms community chapters 230 Where Two or More Are Gathered Ted Dunn explores some of the unique challenges and opportunities pertaining to religious chapters of election, especially highlighting the differences between politics and discernment. 242 Chapter Delegates, Once and Future Sister Marie de Lourdes Mates IHM recapitulates and refurbishes some earnest practical suggestions about what to look for in chapter delegates. 252 Community Chapters: Seven Personal Beliefs Melannie Svoboda SND presents an outline of concrete expectations for a religious congregation's chapter meeting. Reflection and Discussion 226 259 religious life Invisible--Even to Ourselves? Marie Brinkman SCL emphasizes that visible unity-- community bonds--must become the sign of Christ and his church that religious life is meant to be. Review for Religious 269 Living in Community: Continuing the Conversation Doris Gottemoeller RSM returns to the discussion about the place of community living as an uncommon and striking witness to the power of the gospel and the dynamism of a congregation's charism. Psalm Prayer Reflection and Discussion 281 witnessing With Love from Calcutta and Lisieux: Letters of Mother Teresa and St. Thdr~se Mary C. Carroll SSSF gives witness to the wisdom of a loving friendship expressed in the letter exchanges of Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Father Michael van der Peet SCJ and Thdr~se of Lisieux and Maurice Barth~l~my-Belli~re. 296 Alfred Delp SJ and the Heart of Jesus Mary Frances Coady focuses on Alfred Delp's devotion to the Heart of Jesus that sustained him in his Nazi imprisonment and eventual death by hanging. 301 the spirit Led by the Spirit: St. Basil the Great Andrew Ryder SCJ enters us into St. Basil the Great's contributions to our theological understanding and appre-ciation of the Holy Spirit as the third person of the Trinity. departments 316 Scripture Scope: Encountering the Parables of Jesus 321 Canonical Counsel: Additional Comments on Interpretation 326 Book Reviews 64.3 200~ prisms The prevalent theological cat-egory in describing the church is the word com-munion. It is significant that this choice of word confronts the most serious need of our times. Communion emphasizes what binds us together. Theologians today want to say that this word most captures what the church is all about. Pope Benedict xvI, in his initial addresses as the leader of the Roman Catholic commu-nity, has called for a renewed effort among all peoples of religion to look to some kind of bonding or communion. The essential witness that any Christian gives is that of bonding. There is no working for justice unless there is a bonding with the "other." There is no exercise of charity unless there is a communion with the ones being served. As Jesus pointed out consistently, each one of us as a follower comes to serve and not be served--like him. We do not serve justice or charity out of a superior stance; we can only be on the same level, as with our sisters and broth-ers, and it is there that we work. Perhaps we may look like good secular social workers. As Christians, we want more; we are looking towards communion. If marriage in the Christian community has no greater rate of fidelity than secular marriage, then as Christians we are failing. If men and women in religious life commitment do not give Review for Religious witness to a life in common, then they fail in the most essential witness of their religious life. It is not just in entering upon a vocation and it is not just in generous service that we show ourselves to be Christian. The "proof of the pudding" is whether we truly are people who "bond," who live in communion because commu-nion is entering into God's life, the life of the Trinity. How in our times have we lost some ways of "bond-ing," of being in communion? It seems we no longer recognize that there are three progressive steps which Jesus has identified for us in the Gospels. First, there is detachment ("leave your father and your mother," "go, sell") or what we might today call availability. We come with so many non-negotiables; we come with our needs and our demands. Many of us Christians are unavailable to God and to one another. And. so the first step in bond-ing or communion is being available. The second step is generosity or being in service ("come, follow"). We often pride ourselves on how much we do for others, extending ourselves generously with our time and tal-ent. No doubt we are people of service, but is it all on our terms? Are we covetously in control of all our works of justice and charity? Both the first and the second steps can be half steps in living as a Christian. Are half steps any steps at all? The third is, simply, sharing or, rightly understood, surrendering ("take up your cross"). Commun. ion hap-pens when we are available, when we give. generously in service, and when we share our lives unstintingly--as God does with us. Communion or bonding is our 21 st-_century quest as a Catholic community. It is a quest that Jesus tells us is within our ~raced reach. David L. Fleming SJ 64.3 2005 TED DLrNN Where Two or More Are Gathered community chapters It has been said, "Where two or more are gathered, there is politics." Though many religious communities have embraced communal discernment as their preferred means for electing leadership, they are still not immune to the pulls and trappings of politics. Seeking to hear the voice of the Spirit through communal discernment can, at its best, eclipse and far surpass the influence of politics. Communal discernment, however, no matter how well practiced, will neither eradicate politics nor guarantee that there will be no regressive pulls in chapters of election. But awareness of the differences between discernment and politics can help chapter participan~ts resist the forces of politics and secure the grace-filled opportunities of discernment. Ted Dunn, a clinical psychglogist, wrote for us in our 63.3 issue (July 2004). His address remains Comprehensive Consulting Services; 6209 Mid "Rivers Mall Drive, Suite 294; St. Charles, Missouri 63304. Review for Religgous When discernment and politics collide, how can chapter participants make sense of all the forces in play? During a chapter of election, what are some of the regressive urges that may work against a community's efforts at discernment? What are some of the differences between "political" conversations and "discerning" ones? These are questions I address in this article. We are not likely to rid ourselves of politics completely, but I am confident that, if communities commit themselves to communal discernment, they can grow in their capacity to use it well. From my years of facilitating communal discernment, I am confident that goodwill and good ways of channeling it can enhance discernment and diminish politicking. This, in turn, can help communities to seek God's will more fully and thereby discern their choice of leadership more wisely. In line with this I plan to point out some differences between discernment and politics from three angles, namely, numbers, powers of persuasion, and so-called winners and losers. But first I want to set the context by elaborating on regression (returning to old patterns). Regression often emerges during chapters of election and, if left unrecognized and unchecked, can blight a community's desire to put discernment ahead of politics. Regression in the Face of Discernment For a chapter to be a success, its participants should check their human propensities to constrict the movement of the Spirit, and instead work Collectively toward welcoming the Spirit present among them to liberate and enlighten. They should seek ways of enhancing their own spiritual freedom and that of the group, avoiding anything that might hinder it. They need to be alert to personal and group patterns of regression and strive to eliminate them. I would guess that every 64.3 200Y Dunn ¯ Where Two or More Are Gathered community has had, at one time or another, a dark moment in which its chapter of election fell far short of its best intentions and let, for example, politics take precedence over discernment. I would also guess that-- although such a moment tends to recede from the community's consciousness between chapters--it often returns at the beginning of the next chapter. It is as if the walls of the chapter hall hold the memories and, when the chapter is convoked, so too are the memories. Despite such experiences, or perhaps because of them, individuals and communities I am acquainted with have made courageous efforts to move beyond the pain of past elections and write new memories upon the walls. I have witnessed participants building new bridges, mending frayed relationships, offering and accepting olive branches, and all in all seeking greater unity. Communities yearn to grow in discernment and put forth their best green-gold efforts when given the opportunity. Yet I also know that, as in all growing, communities are at risk. They repeat old patterns of tension and vulnerability. As a psychologist I recognize that regression is a natural and normal response in the face of threat. It is a coping mechanism that people use when new ways of behaving seem shaky or are perceived as failing. Think of the first time you tried a new prayer form and it was not working for you. You likely sought refuge, at least temporarily, in the tried and true. Recall a return to your family of origin. Despite your growth in other relationships, in a difficult interaction with a relative you may have returned to a once-outlived means of coping (withdrawing, clashing, and so forth). Recall your community's initial efforts at the more fluid processes of communal discernment and the simulta_neous urges to return to the familiar confines of Robert's Rules and carefully orchestrated conversations. Review for Religious When it comes to elections, politics is what is most familiar to us. It is part of our culture and is no less a part of religious life. Discernment is newly learned and also countercultural behavior. And so, when tensions arise during a chapter, you have any number of urges to return to old patterns, the patterns of politics. You may have urges to-rally around your friends, to defend perceived "victims," to speak for those not speaking. You may want to tune out, or argue with what you do not want to hear, or go silent in the hope of being rescued by others more vocal. You may want to have the meeting outside the meeting (in the halls and over coffee) instead of in the assembly room. You may want to campaign for some, and against some others, and so on. The good news is that such urges do not have to be your destiny. Your next chapter presents you with the challenge and opportunity to write new memories on the walls of your assembly room. It is a chance to further reconcile and redeem the pain of past elections. It is a chance to weave new patterns of interacting into the collective experience of chapters of election and place discernment ahead of politics. But the undertow toward politics will, if left unrecognized, take away your freedom and wreak havoc upon your desire to grow beyond your past. If it is recognized, however, communities have the opportunity to catch themselves and choose instead the grace and gift of communal discernment. Politics as an Impediment to Discernment We humans have an insatiable appetite for politics. Enquiring minds want to know: Who's on first? Who's it Discernment is' newly learned and also coun~ercultural behavior. 64.3 2005 Dunn ¯ 14~bere Two or'More ~lre Gathered going to be? Who's ahead in the polls? In an election year, politics and politicians dominate the evening news, CNN, and the front page. Political talk is with us at meals and up and down hallways and sidewalks. Religious communities, it seems to me, are no less involved with politics. In fact, if politics means involvement, interest, and concern for how you govern yourselves, religious are just as political as any other segment of society. They desire to understand what is going on in the world, in the church, and in the community and to participate in shaping the future. Politics, then, has its good points, but it is important to understand its pitfalls and get beyond them in order to do the deeper work of communal discernment. One risk is that politics and discernment have definite similarities. Both lead to an informed vote in an election. Both seek understanding and involvement. In both methods, information serves to influence people and to moderate that influence. And both methods are about power. There are other commonalities as well, but there are definite distinctions to be drawn too. Where does politics end and discernment begin? Numbers. First let us talk numbers. Numbers sometimes talk long before people get acquainted with the candidates and their character. In the politics of our day, there are endless permutations of the numbers. Numbers are the heartbeat of American pre-election activity. Pollsters keep taking political pulses and making election prognostications. There are more permutations of polls than there are stats on the Super Bowl. Results are statistically projected hours before the polls close. Such results are not official, of course, but they cause people to think and say, "Why vote? It's a done deal." In discernment, however, the significance of numbers is little or none. In many discernment processes a Review for Religious member needs only one endorsement to enter into it. And entering is far more important than trying to forecast where you will end up. Entering the mystery, walking the Emmaus journey, searching out your future together by collectively seeking God's intentions--these things are not concerned with numbers. Numbers will not answer a community's quest for healing, yearnings for a stronger partnership, desires for deeper understanding, or efforts to resolve differences. Counting numbers, wondering how many votes you or someone else might get, will not help you hear the voice of the Spirit. You cannot take a poll to find out what God wants. Numbers at the moment of election have a different, though still secondary, importance. Ideally, numbers are the result of, not the means for, discernment. Ideally, they are the outcome that confirms the will of the Spirit mediated through the chapter. I do not know about your community, but in some communities, once the balloting begins, discernment goes out the window and people start listening to the numbers. They write the numbers down, tally the votes, and track who is getting what. Like a runaway train people start following the numbers instead of the Spirit. The numbers take over. It is important to work as a chapter body to prevent a numbers-oriented election. Facilitators need to intersperse .processes into the election itself to help the community discern its way through to the end. Ideally, the election process should be the culmination of the discernment process, not detached or separate from discernment. In my experience, when an election keeps the integrity of the discerning body and its discernment process intact, then numbers, if used at all, are of negligible importance. Pozver~ of Persuasion. In politics, power is .sought from a variety of sources through a variety of means. Power is 64.3 2005 Dunn ¯ Where Two or More ~qre Gathered found first in the money used for campaigning. Money pays for ads and buys favors from special-interest groups that in turn lobby for their candidates. In one form or another, money runs the machinery that shapes the information that people receive, which is of course the ultimate means of influence. In American politics "information is power," and, if you want to know who has it, "follow the money." While voters want information about what their candidates hope to accomplish, and while politicians vow that they will "stick to the issues," too often there is regression toward name-calling and mudslinging. Politicians know that there is great power in casting doubt upon their opponents. So-called "negative campaigning" persists despite the public outcry against it, in large part because research shows that when used skillfully it works. Political elections, as we have witnessed, are not about how you play the game; they are about winning, no matter the cost. Politics centers on persuasion as a means to attain desired outcomes. Spin doctors seek to persuade by parsing the truth. Political strategists provide different information for different target groups, strategically timing the leakage of news, all in an effort to sway specific voters. Party politics uses these powers of persuasion to garner support for their respective camps, which in turn support their candidates. Selective information to induce fear or call for party loyalty is among the powers of persuasion in American politics. In discernment, though, how you play the game and what kind of power you use make all the difference. The power of discernment rests on faith. It rests on your ability to pray, reflect, and journey together in such a way as to discover your collective truth, to experience the movement of the Spirit among yourselves. Paradoxically, Review for Religious the power of discernment is inversely related to persuading others or controlling the outcome. In fact, detachment from the outcome, rather than attempting to engineer the outcome, is a hallmark of discernment. Discernment requires conversations about the direction your community is moving, the issues you face, and the ideal team to facilitate the desired movement. It is about who can complement whom, not who is better than whom. It is not about camps competing around special interests. It is about cooperating in the interests of the whole. Instead of trying to convince others of your truth, communal discernment invites you to discover the community's collective truth. Discernment is not about campaigning, convincing, and cajoling, but about listening, sharing, and deepening the common understanding. Chapter participants are not chosen to elect favorite, candidates to represent personal interests, but rather to come up with a team of persons who together can best serve the interests of the entire community. I believe that the power of communal discernment is in direct proportion to a group's determination to be enlightened by one another and by the commitment of all to the common good. This power is present in direct proportion to your freedom, individually and collectively, to respond to the Spirit echoed in the voices of all the chapter members. It is present to the degree you are interiorly free from whatever might bind you, be it your loyalties to others, passions around your own agendas, fears of being hurt or hurting others, or haunting and hurting memories. It is present when people are free of 64.3 2005 Dunn ¯ Where Two or More Are Gathered prejudice and free of gossipy reputations, of labels that persist year after year. Being flee, however, does not mean an absence of anxiety and fears. Rather, it means a willingness to name, claim, and, if possible, work through your fears rather than succumb to them. It means acknowledging your desired outcomes while simultaneously relinquishing any efforts to control them. It means a willingness to enter the unpredictability and mystery of your personal and communal faith journey. If you are free enough to embrace a truth larger than your own--free of efforts to hide from uncomfortable truths or blind yourselves to a common good that may ask more of you than you want to give--then your power to discern is enhanced. The power of such spiritual freedom is yours to claim. No one can claim it for you or work towards it for you. Freedom is inherently yours to begin with. If you do this work collectively, if you maintain deep roots of knowledge, passion, and conviction while holding all things lightly, then you will have access to the Spirit moving through you and among you, The movement of the Spirit and your own search for enlightenment and understanding are at the heart of discernment. Discernment is the polar opposite of politics. It is a continuous focus on winning, not on having won and resting on our laurels. Winners and Losers. Let us talk about so-called winners and losers. Who is better? The St. Louis Rams or the Dallas Cowboys, the French or the Irish, African Americans or Caucasians or Hispanics, rich or poor, tall or short, women at the well or men at the "Y," a lilac ora rose? We humans are prone to thinking in categories and classes. We have carved up God's creation into categories. We have boxed and labeled the people and things of our world as good or bad, right or wrong, winners or losers. Review for Religious ¯ We have prejudices, biases, preconceived notions, assumptions, and conscious and subconscious judgments that put price tags on so many things that God looked at and said are "good." God sees us all as both blessed and broken, but we seem to view ourselves as good, better, best, less than good or less than evil, depending upon our looks, ethnicity, friends, affiliations, or supposed motives. Children not chosen for this or that often feel "excluded" and "hurt." Out of such feelings we form judgments and begin to think in terms of winners and losers. From facilitating many community discernments over the years, I consider all participants winners. All community members who are endorsed, who come to discernment gatherings, who respond to the call to serve in elected leadership are winners. They take risks that have brought hurts in the past and perhaps even made them say to themselves "Never again." COmmunal disdernment i~,~[fOiJ[: ~de" }in g women ~ ~or men ~who,brzn~ g together a complement of gifls tha~;~in its ~isimportant for ~he :enti@ ~com~u~ity. Those who participate in discernment are asked to reach deep inside themselves to find hope again, when staying disengaged would be easier. Individually and together they are winners as they extend themselves beyond their comfort zone in response to calls from their community. Conventional politics would suggest that those who are elected have the "right stuff" and those who are not elected do not. Communal discernment, however, is about electing women or men who bring together a complement of gifts that, in its unity, is important for the entire community. 64.3 200Y Dunn ¯ Where Two or More Are Gathered Not long ago my wife and I attended our daughters' graduations, Kelly from high school and Colleen from middle school. For the occasion we went out to buy them some flowers. The florist asked, "What are their colors?" I was taken aback, having expected to pick out bouquets from the showcase and be done with it. She escorted us to a refrigerator, showed us a vast array of flowers, and urged us to have a whiff and take a good look at them. Before long we had flowers and greenery and paper strewn over the counter. Other customers watched us try various combinations to see what would best fit each girl's particular likes and sense of beauty. There were lilacs, roses, and other flowers whose names escape me. In combination, some were not the right color and some not the right fragrance. Some got lost alongside others. All were beautiful in their own right, but some fit better than others in the bouquets. At last we had two unique bouquets, each beautiful, each saying what we wanted to say. In your next communal discernment, remember that every individual has a beauty all her own. Blessed and broken, gifted and flawed, they are on the same journey as you. Some combinations of their beauty will express what you want to say, what you hope leadership to be. Others will not. This makes them no less wonderful, no less worthy. Their beauty will find other bouquets. In your next discernment, honor all these women (or men) with your prayers. Support all of them with your encouragement. Affirm them for their courage in walking deep into discernment with you, opening themselves up in personal ways to you, to each other, and to God. Walk gently with them. Your next chapter of election will be a continuation of the work you have begun at earlier chapters. It presents you with an opportunity to grow in communal discernment and Review for Religious be more faithful on your personal and communal faith journey. Anticipate, identify, and resist any regressive tendencies. Keep the election a matter of the Spirit, not a matter of mere numbers. Do not let it be about winners and losers. You are all winners, for you are all on the same team. Be gentle with yourselves and with your mistakes, for mistakes will surely be made. In your efforts to write new memories on the walls, may the Holy Spirit be your guide, and, where two or more of you are gathered, may you find Jesus in your midst. The Transient Seed To go wherever you would lead Will mean ourselves to die, Forsaking self and every need For you, risen, on high. Buried with you, the transient seed Awaits your Spirit-cry Creating us anew, rubied By blood from Calvary. Walt Bado SJ 64.3 2005 MARIE DE LOURDES MATES Chapter Delegates, Once and Future ~onh~hne m qyu arleigtiieosn aanl dsu rpeesrpioonr saisbkileidti ems eo tfo c shpaepatekr delegates, my response was typically prophetic. I screamed into the phone: "What? Me? Why me? Don't you think I'm a bit too old for this? You're twenty-five years too late! I know a lot of people who could do a better job." She listened politely and then replied, "Well, will you at least think about it?" So I did, and for some reason I just could not say no. Father Robert Morneau's article (1977, almost thirty years ago) was suggested as the basis for what I might say. Since I did not have a copy of it, I began to make my own list of qualities a delegate should have. I came up with a dozen or so. To my surprise, when the article arrived I discovered that the future bishop and I were thinking along the same lines. I thought to myself, "Maybe I should have been a bishop!" Many of you could Marie de Lourdes Mates IHM, who has taught at all levels of K-12 and published various articles, resides at the IHM House of Prayer; 140 West Mill Street; Nesquehoning, Pennsylvania 18240. Review for Religious come up with a similar list. I admit, though, that I learned a great deal in getting this presentation ready and even experienced a kind of conversion. That is what I will share with you now. The first word that came to my mind was articulate. I wanted delegates who would speak out loud and clear. But almost immediately I had a second thought--Whoa! Suppose they go too far and destroy what our unique history has gifted us with. No, another thing that must be present is a listening ear. This slowed me down, and I pondered the word dialogical, which Bishop Morneau had used. I called upon Webster for help: "dialogue: a talking together, a conversation." Not sufficient! Definition 2: "an interchange and discussion of ideas, especially when open and frank, as in seeking mutual understanding and harmony." Perfect! In other words, the listening has to be of a special kind, but so also does the speaking. To be articulate means to speak easily and clearly; you have to be pretty well convinced about what you are saying. Let me interject here a little story about listening. An interaction years ago with a freshman girl stopped me in my tracks and made me realize I was not truly lis-tening. Her parents were divorced. Her father was out of sight. The thirteen-year-old and her mother lived together, but in time the mother became interested in another man. She left her teenage daughter to fend for herself every weekend while she traveled by plane to spend two days with him. When. the daughter told me this story, I tried to explain that her mother had needs also. She looked up at me with tear-filled eyes and said in a shaking voice "But what about me?" I knew at once I had failed to enter into her world. I have never for-gotten her words, and even now they haunt me, still find-ing it hard to really listen. 64.3 200.q Mates ¯ Chapter Delegates, Once and Future Our delegates need to speak easily and clearly, but they also need to listen with a compassionate desire to enter into the speaker's world, not necessarily agreeing but at least understanding. Besides speaking and listen-ing well, Bishop Morneau said delegates must have trust. I thought, "Oh, this is an easy one. Isn't it a given that members of a religious community have a deep abiding trust in each other, as their polite conduct habitually shows? The thing that stymied me was that Morneau went on to say that they must have trust also in themselves. I puzzled over this long and hard. I came to realize that persons who have trust in themselves will speak their own insights and convictions with a certain self-confidence. I realized, too, that to do this they must spend time and energy listening to others and be willing to say inside chapter what they say outside chapter. Coupled with trust is another virtue, desire for truth. Regardless of who speaks--a retired sister, a young novice, a former mother general, an infirm sister, an artist (musician, painter, sculptor, poet, and so forth), or just one of the rest of us--the delegate's desire for truth must help her listen and then evaluate. She needs to turn off the stream of consciousness that runs all day long and sometimes washes past others, hardly slowing down for them. Our delegates should be prophetic persons. The Old Testament prophets acquiesced to God's call only reluc-tantly. Consider the following. Isaiah says, "What a wretched state I'm in. I am a man of unclean lips." Review for Religious Jeremiah says, "Look, I do not know how to speak; I am a child." Jonah--well, he just ran away. But God was insistent. With Isaiah: "Let's see if this live coal touching your lips will help." With Jeremiah: "Don't say you are a child. Go, now!" With Jonah, a storm at sea begins to get him to pay some mind to God. Consider the great-est prophet of all, Jesus: "Father, if it be your will, let this chalice pass. However, not my will, but yours be done." Being prophetic does not appear to be a much-sought- after vocation. I am mentioning these things about prophets because the women we elect as delegates will automatically assume the role of prophet. They will be missioned by us to determine the future direction of our IHM commu-nity. If this direction is to be in accord with the will of God, certain characteristics should be evident. They should be women who are perceptive, sensitive to the here and now. We hope they will walk unshod the way of the lowest and the least. We want them to come up with new and exciting ideas for all of us--the old and infirm, the young and ambitious, those nearing retirement, those changing their apostolates. We want them to respond sensitively to the question "But what about me?" as each group asks it. We also want them to be sensitive to our roots and traditions, knowing enough of our history to stand firmly on the shoulders of the courageous holy women who were here before us. Prophets are courageous. Consider some from our own time. Dorothy Day, who did jail time for civil disobedi-ence and also (as Father Richard McSorley said) "led the way within the Catholic Church on solidarity with the poor, racial justice., all those big issues., she brought the name Catholic to all of them. These issues that pri-vate Catholics see as politics she saw as faith, and knew it had to come from faith and be alive with faith." 64.3 200~ Mates ¯ Cbapter Delegates, Once and Future Consider our foundress, Mother Theresa Maxis, who was forced to live outside the community she had worked so hard to establish. Consider Mother Teresa of Calcutta, who embraced lepers and opened her heart to the poor-est of the poor. Consider Joan Chittister, Benedictine sister, ' whose outcries for justice and peace have been heard and will continue to be heard by many around the world. Perhaps now as we prepare for the chapter of 2006, some new courageous happenings will occur. Courage can be manifested in all kinds of ways. It might be just bringing an issue to the forefront for consideration. It might be putting some relationships in jeopardy because of what some see only as boldness or outspokenness. The model delegate should be a person of vision-- but what exactly does that mean? It definitely does not mean they live in la-la land. Sometimes, however, I think that the term vision triggers a picture of someone out in space. So let us bring it down to earth. Simply, an IHM sister of vision sees something that many do not. That "something" could be anything from a cute idea to a unique dream. It could be something so commonplace as a one-on-one learning environment, only one teacher and one learner. It could be a duck farm. A friend called me one day and asked if she and her cousin could use my computer and set up a conference call with a con-struction company. I said yes, thinking it was a matter of great import. It turned out that he was just starting to plan a duck farm. His long-range plan was to raise ducks for gourmet restaurants. To me this seemed crazy, but when he promised me a duck dinner I thought--who knows?--that maybe in the not-too-distant future he would be a man of means. The sister who has vision will see value in what at first seems crazy to most people. I am suggesting that Review for Religious we have to look beyond the ends of our noses to deter-mine the best direction for our aging community. We need to have some answers for the young, the old, and the in-between in our community when they ask, "But, what about me?" Victor Hugo, author of Les Miserables and The Hunchback of Notre Dame, had this to say about visions: "Progress will be carried forward by a series of dazzling visions." I love that word "dazzling." The visions have to be startling; they have to awaken us and get us moving. Long before Victor Hugo, the prophet Habakkuk also had something to say about "the vision." I remember it from a time about twenty-five years ago. In her morning talk a speaker had created an air of excitement, but in the after-noon session the excitement disappeared. I left the assem- .,,. Prophetie delegates need t6 be pcrsoqs, of " ,de ray&;: especially script al prayer. bly feeling rather down, but I remembered the words of Habakkuk from the day's Scripture reading. It is time to hear those words again: Write down the vision clearly upon the tablets, so that one can read it readily. For the vision still has its time, presses on to fulfillment, and will not disappoint. If it delays, wait for it, it will surely come, it will not be late. (Hab 2:2-3) As I said, being a prophet is not a fun thing. Prophetic delegates have to work hard: read, study, do research. They have to make decisions, some very hard decisions. They have to make them decisively, with cer-titude (as Morneau says, referring to Newman), and then hold themselves responsible for what results. They need to be persons of deep prayer, especially Scriptural prayer. 64.3 200Y Mates ¯ Chapter Delegates, Once and Future Such prayer will illuminate their understanding of con-temporary issues. Dorothy Day can help us here. In her autobiography The Long Loneliness, she describes herself at the age of ten. "We lived in a house with an attic, and I spent hours one rainy Sunday afternoon reading the Bible. I remember nothing that I read, just the sense of holiness in holding the book in my hands. I did not know then that the Word in the Book and the Word in the flesh of Christ's humanity were the same, but I felt I was handling something holy." Dorothy's love of the Scriptures persisted throughout her lifetime and even-tually led to her conversion to Catholicism and to her lifelong work with the poor. Scriptural prayer should be the mainstay of every chapter member. It already plays a major role in all of our lives in the Christian Prayer that we pray three times a day. It would be worth the while of every chapter delegate, in fact every sister who puts her name on the list of nom-inees, to ponder well the words of Hebrews 4:12: "The Word of God is something alive and active: it cuts like any double-edged sword but more finely; it can slip through the place where the soul is divided from the spirit, or joints from the marrow; it can judge the secret emo-tions and thoughts." And then suddenly in verse 13 it switches from the Word of God as an "it" to the Word of God as "the one": "No created thing can hide from him; everything is uncovered and open to the eyes of the one to whom we must give account of ourselves." Dorothy Day at age ten was assuredly an inspired person. You might wonder why I have referred to Dorothy Day more than once. When I was a junior in high school, I joined the Martin de Porres Club at Harrisburg Catholic High. Every Thursday my friends and I traveled to an inner-city house run by a woman named Mary Frecon. There we taught little African American children, helping Review for Religious them with their school work and interacting with them. One Thursday I noticed that the work space was spruced up as if for something important to happen. About the middle of the session, Mary came through accompanied by an elderly woman with white hair. They simply paused for a few minutes, and I simply ignored them, being involved with the children and their work. Afterwards Mary came back and exclaimed, "Do you know who that was?" I shrugged my shoulders. She said, "That was Dorothy Day." I shrugged my shoulders again. Later on in life, I got to know about Dorothy Day. I have never forgotten her favorite quotation, taken directly from Dostoyevsky's The Possessed: "All my life I have been haunted by God." To that I add: All my life I have been haunted by Dorothy Day! To me her life seems the per-fect response to the question of the poor, the addicted, the sick, the helpless when they ask "But what about me?" Morneau ends his article about chapters by portray-ing the delegate as a wounded healer, the term that Henri Nouwen had introduced. Most of us would admit to being wounded people, people who have experienced some deep hurts, which sometimes seem beyond heal-ing. But out of those hurts can come deep compassion for others who are hurting. Without being told, one can sense it. Compassion heals, not only the one to whom the compassion is directed but also the one who is showing compassion. Hopefully, the delegates we choose will be women of compassion. Persons of compassion do not make judgments on the motives of others. If you have ever been the object of judgmentalism, your experience helps you avoid inflicting such destructiveness on others. A delegate should be able to balance tolerance of per-sons with an intolerance of falsity. Do not be dismayed if you are chosen to be a chap-ter delegate and you do not have all these qualities. It 64.3 2005 Mates ¯ Chapter Delegates, Once and Future will be an elegant sufficiency if the chapter assembly itself contains individuals who together have these qual-ities. It would be a miracle if anyone had all of them. Here let me quote, what Morneau quotes toward the end of his article (Micah 6:8): "This is what Yahweh asks of you: only this, to act justly, to love tenderly, and to walk humbly with your God." I would emphas!ze the first challenge: "to act justly." I believe it encompasses everything that has been said up to this point. If we work to act justly, to DO justice, everything else will fall into place. As a community we are already becoming more involved in works of justice. We are responding to the poor and the needy here in the United States and in Haiti, Peru, and Chile. We are attentive to the question "But what about me?" and are alleviating pain and suffering where we are able. One day in Louisville, Kentucky, at Fourth and Locust, Thomas Merton suddenly realized that he loved all people and no one was alien to him. As a community we are growing in that same realization. For me there occurred a profound conversion to justice in the sum-mer of 1973, while I was studying physics at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York. One weekend a Franciscan sister took me along to her motherhouse in Buffalo. We visited Niagara Falls, and I was duly impressed. But later we drove upstream to view the Niagara River, the flow of which creates the falls--and mesmerized me. The river's swiftness took my breath away. The sunlight glittering off the surging waters filled me with a kind of supernatural joy, while their force to sweep everything before it--and me too if I let it--fright-ened me. I have never forgotten that impression. The memory awakes in me every time I read the prophet Amos (5:24, l~SV):."But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream." Review for Religious Can you imagine what our world would be like if more and more people let their justice roll down like a river? For us I think the time is ripe. Let's ROLL! The Crossing John 6:17 The crossing is hazardous: fragility 6fold wood in a fretful sea, the weight of oars against contentious waves, implacable darkness, absence of horizon, ominous thunders. Then - the skin grows cold with terror - like a brooding spirit he comes gravely across the water: fathomless radiance, first light of a new world. They stammer in recognition and welcome him into the boat where no one dares question what darkness he has crossed to bring them safe to land. Kate Martin OSC 64.3 2005 MELANNIE SVOBODA Community Chapters: Seven Personal Beliefs y personal beliefs about this chapter we are ~. iv .1. beginning amount to seven, the perfect biblical number. 1. This chaplet won't be easy. I say this not because I have some secret knowledge of what will transpire here these next few days. I say it because this chapter is a part of life and life is not easy. As we know, in the Bible the primary image of life is a journey, and any journey is fraught with difficulties. It takes courage even to embark on a journey, because we must leave where we are, we must let go of the known. We cannot start on a journey and stay put at the same time. Once we have taken to the road, we must negotiate unexpected turns, steer clear of dangerous potholes, plan regular "pit stops," devise detours around roadblocks, interpret road signs, and check the fuel gauge regularly. (Recently I saw a cartoon of two men walking away from their car. They had run Melannie Svoboda SND, provincial of the Sisters of Notre Dame of Chardon, Ohio, presented this material as part of the opening of their chapter of December 2003. Her address is 13000 Auburn Road; Chardon, Ohio 44024. Review for Religious out of gas. One man says to the other, "I thought the E meant Enough!" It is one thing to see signs, another to interpret them correctly!)Journeying is hard work. Small wonder that we are often tempted to forsake the life journey by going back into the past (it is familiar and feels safe), by stopping altogether, or by taking a side road that is easier but leads to no place worth going. At this chapter let us recommit ourselves to the hard work of daily living, to the hard work of our earthly jour-neying. And let us commit ourselves to the hard work of this particular chapter--four days of undeniable self-discipline, the discipline of sitting, listening, speaking, praying, discerning, waiting in line. Talk about modern asceticism! 2. This chapter will be fun. It will be fun because we are here--and just look at us! What a unique group we are! Has God got a sense of humor or what? This chapter will be fun because where we are there is bound to be some joy and laughter. When we did the recent inter-views for the Appreciative Inquiry, how many of us said that one reason we were drawn to the Sisters of Notre Dame in the first place was their joyfulness! This chap-ter will be fun also because the planning committee has thought up some fun activities for us to do. But, most of all, it will be fun because we know who is ultimately in charge of this chapter. Not me, not our facilitator, but God! Yes, at this chapter we will discuss some seri-ous issues. Yes, we will make some serious decisions. Yes, there may even be a few tears as we try to express what is deepest in our hearts. But I hope we will do the work of this chapter with a lightness of heart that comes from our charism: that deep experience of God's goodness and provident care. Jesus is at this chapter. Maybe we should have made a folder with his name on it, Jesus is here in word, in 64.3 2005 Svoboda ¯ Community Chapters 254 sacrament, in each other. It is in Jesus' name that we are gathered here, and, as Jesus promised, "Where two or three are gathered in my name, there I will be!" Jesus is with us. Emmanuel. That fact cannot help but bring smiles to our faces! 3. This chapter needs me. This chapter needs every sis-ter regardless of her age, education, health, ministry, temperament, background, mood. It needs every sister regardless of her chosen level of participation. In the name of all of us, then, I welcome every sister to speak. And I welcome every sister to listen and to pray. Throughout these days we will have times of formal dis-cussion. But we will also have times of informal sharing as we gather around the coffee urn, eat lunch together, meet in the hall, or ride back and forth in a car. The Spirit can use even these times to move hearts. Perhaps I may never say anything at the open mike, but I can still influence this chapter by some.thing I say in my small group or even while standing in line for the restroom. 4. This chapter must be rooted in the real world. God is found only in the real world--not some fantasy world of our own making. No, in the real world. And what does the real world look like? First of all, it is a world of incomparable beauty--from stars to snowflakes, roses to mountains, sunsets to the Grand Canyon. So much beauty! It is a world filled with innumerable people of goodwill--in all lands, in all cultures--people who live their lives with faith and love. But the real world is also a world steeped in war and violence. Historians tell us the 20th century was the bloodiest century in human his-tory. Ours is a world of the obscenely unfair distribu-tion of the world's limited resources--where 1.2 billion people live on less than one dollar a day. The Jesuit Jon Sobrino calls this reality a "macro blasphemy." It is a world filled with hunger, poverty, greed, corruption, and Review for Religious wanton disregard for the sanctity of human life. I could go on. But, the fact remains, this is the world into which Jesus was born over two thousand years ago, the world in which he still lives. And it is the world he calls us to serve today. This chapter, therefore, must acknowledge both the beauty and the ugliness of the real world. It must take into consider-ation both the light and the darkness in the world--the world not only out there, but the world in here, in °,. ,,. ~ .~' .' our community and in our own hearts. We began our chapter with a reconciliation service. That was no accident. May forgiveness and rec-onciliation be an underlying theme of everything we do here these days--and beyond. 5. This chapter can't do everything, but it must do some-thing. When we contemplate all the needs of the world, we can become overwhelmed. So many voices crying out for help! Yet our resources are so limited. At times the inces-sant cry of the poor can even paralyze us. We can find ourselves crying, "We can't do everything!" And that is true. We cannot. But, for God's sake, let us do something. I believe this chapter will do something. I do not know what, but it will. That something might be the passing of a proposal dear to my heart--or the defeat of one I cher-ish. Maybe this chapter will result in a single step in a new direction or an old one. Or maybe this chapter will begin to name the content of our next province plan, the focus of future province summer assemblies, or the agenda for the next provincial leadership team. Whatever this chapter does, I hope and pray it will result in some definite corporate movement forward. But °our chapter i ith recOnciliation service? 64.3 2005 Svoboda ¯ Community Chapters I also hope this chapter will challenge me on a deeply personal level. I hope it will make demands upon me, stretch my thinking, and cause me to question some of my daily choices--and cause me to alter them in per-haps subtle but very real ways. 6. This chapter will not be perfect. That is because we are not perfect. And imperfect people do not a perfect chapter make! Sometimes I hear sisters say, "I don't expect much from this chapter, because all we do is talk about the same stuff over and over again. I'm tired of it!" Well, I'm not! I am not tired of the fact that we often end up talking about the "same stuff"--like community, ministry, prayer, the vows, mission. I am not surprised or disappointed either, because that "stuff" lies at the very core of our identity as women religious. The way I see it, we will always be talking about these things--we should be! Why? Because we are on a journey, and, as we go forward, life will continuously challenge our under-standing of who we are and what we should be about. Could we ever exhaust the topic of prayer? No. Will we ever be "finished" with mission? No. Will we ever be able to say, "Well, we have no more problems with community living." Or, "Well, we've got poverty down pat now, so let's move on to something else. How about chastity?" No. In the novel The Secret Life of Bees, August, a middle-aged black woman, says to the little girl Lily, "There is nothing perfect. There is only life." We could say something similar: there is no perfect chapter. There is only this chapter. The feast of Christmas reminds us that Jesus came into our broken and messy world. He did not wait for the ideal time to come. Let us not let our hopes for the ideal chapter prevent us from doing some-thing good with this real one. 7. This chapter must be about loving. Let there be no mistake: we are gathered here these four days for one Review for Religious purpose only: to become better lovers. That is the bot-tom line. This chapter must help us to love better the incredible God who seduced each one of us into mak-ing a lifelong commitment of "chastity, poverty, and obe-dience according to the spirit and content of the Constitutions of the Sisters of Notre Dame." God seduced us. I know of no better word to describe the experience we all underwent. As consecrated religious we have the duty to keep ourselves in this ardent, pas-sionate, and dangerous state of loving. May this chapter rekindle our wholehearted and reck-less love for God, for Jesus. May it remind us that we are partners with Jesus in his mission--not because we have signed up for a cause, but because we have said a loving yes to a person. May this chap-ter rekindle our love for the. church. Oh, the church! Our poor, poor church! The terri-ble scandals! The unspeakable crimes! The betrayal, the deceit! But may we remember that this church is still our church. It is still Christ's church. As Archbishop Sean O'Malley, of Boston, said at his installation ceremony, "though we are living through a ~ad chapter in the church's history, we must recall that it is a chapter, not the whole book!" And then he said these profound words: "We come here today to ask God to make our pain redemptive." What fitting words for us, as Sisters of Notre Dame who have a 153-year-old history of being marked by the cross and a 153-year-old tradition of loy-alty to the church. And, finally, may this chapter rekindle our love and devotion to one another. May it remind us that, by mak- , H'a~v .e. .w. e :ever tho:u g h t ¯of a chapter as having onepuNoseonlY) :to become ,better.lovers ? 64.3 200Y Svoboda * Community Chapters ing our vows, we have bound ourselves to one another for the term of our whole lives. We have promised to live religious life not in the abstract, but within this partic-ular, concrete congregation, the Sisters of Notre Dame. For most of us that means being embedded in the province of Christ the King of Chardon, Ohio. We live in a culture that deifies privacy, individualism, and con-trol of one's destiny. Such a culture desperately needs our witness of community, the witness of diverse indi-viduals living and working together--selflessly and joy-fully-- in Jesus' name to bring about the kingdom of God. My final prayer is a simple one. May this chapter rekindle in us the hope-filled daring of St. Julie, of Sister Aloysia, and of those countless sisters who have gone before us. And may our hope-filled daring be an inspi-ration for those Sisters of Notre Dame who will come after us--in whatever country they may be. In his apos-tolic exhortation Vita consecrata (§110), Pope John Paul says these words to us: "You have not only a glorious history to remember and recount, but also a great history to be accomplished." May this chapter be one small step toward the accomplishment of that great history. 258 Reflection Questions 1. What are the personal beliefs I would list about an upcoming chapter in my congregation? 2. What are some of the ways that we, could bring a sense of joy and a sense of passion into the ordinary busi-ness of a chapter? Review for Religious MARIE BRINKMAN Invisible-- Even to Ourselves? It comes as something of a shock to learn that some people of the Catholic faith community do not know what we are up to--we women reli-gious, that is. Engrossed in ministry as we are most of the time and in close touch with asso-ciates, colleagues, and other friends who by now take for granted our attire and our social or pro-fessional habits, we hardly realize that some still wonder where we have gone or why we live as we do.~ Others see almost nothing of our pre-sent community life or our ministries born of renewal, for we have made ourselves invisible. Unless they happen to know one or two us per-sonally, young women see little of the differ-ence we make to the church and less to attract them to the vowed life we lead. This is a claim many of us might question or debate, but few young women are knocking at our doors to give themselves to our enterprise. ] 259 I :. Marie Brinkman SCL wrote for us in 1971 and 2001. She may be addressed at Sisters of Charity; 4200 South Fourth Street; Leavenworth, Kansas 66048. 64.3 2005 Brinlrman * Invisible ~ Even to Ourselves? I want a other generation Of sisters for the ture mission and life of our community? This is not the place or time to raise moot questions about discarded religious symbolism. Options have been made available, freedom to discern how we will dress and where or with whom we will live in relation to ministries that we believe witness to the gospel. Yet, forty years after the beginning of our renewal, people ask if we are going to survive as vowed communities or congregations. How have we failed to convey to ,:~ them that we are not only alive and well but also are planning for a future even more vigorous and effective than our past? Given our reduced numbers and what some perceive as a disappear-ing act, that may sound like a pipe dream: Women's intu-ition, unreliable. Wishful thinking. Plain presumption. We stand open to such charges, but we do not accept them. Our young sisters are realists and pose questions of their own. Let me mention a few I encountered as we. were preparing for our sixteenth general chapter. In the reports from the council, from task forces, and from standing committees, notes from sisters fifty-five and younger were given careful attention. Calling themselves "Between Alpha and Omega," these sisters--who stand between the community's past and future--asked about the quality of community life, the diffusion of ministries, and a "visioning process" for looking at our future. A few paradoxes appeared as well as concerns we should all share. Repeatedly they asked for direction from com-munity leadership. ¯ Does the small size of local houses limit choices of how we can live in community? Review for Religious ¯ Are local communities willing to support a new kind of associate program allowing young people to live with some of us for a limited or extended time? ¯ How can we envision the future of relationships between SCLs and HCLs (our North American sis-ters and our hermanas of Latin America) and between our sponsored works and new ministries? That is, how can we deepen our unity of mission?2 Questions from the Associate Program director sug-gest the need for greater unity with the laity with whom we have intentionally allied ourselves for the past twenty years. Ties have been forged, and leadership within our institutions has been handed over; the identity and roles of our 180 associates are not so clear. One of them asked me how they might become more aware of the issues we face in chapter and beyond. That suggests a need for better communication and stronger collaboration with our associates--a stage other communities have already reached and gone beyond.3 A fundamental question the director of vocation min-istry posed to chapter delegates was a challenge that implied more than prayer and moral support. She asked us to ask ourselves: "Do I want another generation of sis-ters for the future mission and life of our community?" A firm yes in reply would bring a pledge to tithe a percent-age of time for the effort. Extrapolating from her recom-mendations suggests ways of committing time and talent. For example, the communication office for promotion of religious life in every channel of the media could draw on the volunteer services of active retired sisters. Houses of hospitality throughout the community could use the services of partially employed or volunteer sisters.4 A startling question came from the director of ini-tial formation, speaking in chapter on behalf of the fifty-five- and-under group. She wondered whether we realize 64.3 200~ Brinkman ¯ Invisible --Even to Ourselves? that, as women religious deepening our renewal of mis-sion and ministry, we are living "on the fringe" of the church in its present hierarchical operation,s Given facts from which the question comes, I would have replied that on the contrary we are at the heart of the church renewing itself. It is a matter of perspective, but I think she is the more realistic about the present and a consid-erable piece of the future. During a chat after an inter-congregational gathering, a novice, expressing what she felt, said in effect: "Where's our vision? Let's not be dis-tracted by a future of diminishing numbers and advanc-ing age. I want to hear us talk about the present and our potential and what we can do now to make a new future come to be.''6 She wondered whether so many small dwellings and so little cultural diversity can offer com-munity to new members. That is the voice of new life and promise. That is the echo of our founders, who knew nothing but risk and challenge. What they did we can do on new frontiers and in new ways. In her report a community councilor considered our progress in living out the vision statement of the 1998 general chapter, pledging us "to love the poor, to love one another, to live simply, and to unite the whole of our lives in the poor and loving Christ." Some of her questions challenged us to assess our lives in the light of priorities we have set for ourselves: to partner with the poor for mutual transformation, to simplify our lives in the spirit of our founders, and to make our local com-munity a welcoming experience and genuine support for each member--rather than a comfort to ourselves. Other questions challenged us to deeper awareness of what globalization has brought to the poor, to all our ministries, and to the life and mission of the church. They asked us to examine what "gospel values" and "work for systemic change" mean--in terms, for example, Review for Religious of personal and house budgets. They asked if we wish to--or even can--remain an ethnically homogenous group in the face of cultural diversity that is literally changing the face of the country we live in. Does our advocacy for the poor change us as it should?7 The councilor's questions carried implications. We may not be aware of who we really are or have become. Deeply different experiences of religious life and com-munity living divide us even within our day-to-day unity. The reconciliation we struggled to achieve during renewal chapters allows for a degree of hid-den complacency. Different perspectives on how our ministries--individual and community-sponsored-- manifest our mission may hinder further transforming action. Do we know what we are capable of and to what the Spirit now calls us? It is only fair to remark here that the chapter confronted these and other prob-ing questions persistently and with no little vision and courage. Writing the story of our community's last fifty years, I have learned something of the potential residing in institutions we sponsor and in various ways still staff. Their growth over these decades of diminishment reveals what women have always done in times of retrenchment: put people first, get purposes clear, find means where there were none, and never take no for an answer. The deluge of facts and figures took shape in patterns of change and renewal that most congrega- 64.3 2005 Brinkman ¯ Invisible -- Even to Ourselves? tions could duplicate or surpass. They include: ¯ mergers and coordinated systems of parochial schools, moving from strength of programs into lay administra-tion and staffing, and continuing commitment to under-served or inner-city areas ¯ the maturing of a small liberal-arts college for women into a coeducational university offering baccalaureate and masters' degrees to working adults, getting under-prepared minority students ready for college, educating youth to service ¯ incorporation of hospitals--regional leaders in health-care-- under a centralized health-services system com-mitted to community education and the care of all persons in need regardless of their ability to pay ¯ operating clinics staffed by sister or lay administrators and volunteer professionals to serve uninsured families and individuals ¯ transforming homes for parentless children into com-plex professional partnerships for treatment, care, and schooling of emotionally disturbed youngsters in both residential and day programs ¯ staffing missions in Latin America through forty years of growth into native leadership in formation and expan-sion of catechetical and healthcare ministries. As separate incorporation and lay boards for hospitals, homes, and the unive~'sity became advisable and advan-tageous, community sponsorship maintained the charism of the Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth through strong programs of mission integration. Certainly such collab-orationand continued presence in institutions that serve cities, states, and regions affirm an identity and confirm a religious mission. Are numbers, uniform dress, and common quarters necessary for recognition and symbolic significance to those who care anything about it? If not, what then is lacking? Why are those who retain such out- Review for Religious ward signs drawing young candidates, and why are we who faithfully minister without them relatively invisible? Individual ministries have witnessed to the gospel and offered religious presence in unprecedented ways during the last four decades. Pastoral ministry drew early numbers; women took leading roles in liturgical renewal, youth ministry, and the adaptation of the RCIA to cate-chesis and religious formation. Degrees in theology, min-istry, and canon law led sisters to chancery offices and marriage tribunals, to social services and diocesan hous-ing, and to spiritual direction and retreat centers. Choices of hospital chaplaincy, ministry to the dying and their families, guidance in holistic health, and counseling of delinquents, single parents, and families meant personal encounters that called on a deep prayer life and com-munity bonds. More rare but equally demanding have been calls to scholarship, writing, and the creative arts. Potentially paradigmatic in their effectiveness and extent are individual ministries to AIDS patients, admin-istration of mission and even city parishes in the West, and repair and renovation of houses for poor families in urban areas. Partnering with civic agencies is integral to such ministries. Our Office of Social Justice and Peace has allied our communi~ for these thirty years with the lobbying forces of Network, with religious and lay groups committed to creating a sustainable environment and combating systemic poverty and oppression, and with the humanitarian offices of the United Nations. Such collaboration is common to most religious congrega-tions. The community's leadership has allied us with the Charity Federation and the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) in their proactive agendas of renewal and mission. All of these ministries and alliances are familiar to professed religious. To allude to them is to make a point, 64.3 2005 Brinkman ¯ Invisible --Even to Ourselves? 266 namely, that the renewed unity of mission and ministry that many now seek and a renewed visibility in service to the church consist in much more than celebrating our differences and prioritizing our use of limited resources. Our unity and visibility consist, on the other hand, in more than freedom to diversify our ministries in part-nering with the poor. Making our mission and commu-nity manifest requires that we discern the Spirit's call to all women religious who believe that in their unity the people of God have a unique source of power. Our vis-ible unity must become the sign of Christ and his church that religious life is meant to be. Our unity is a crucial response to the Spirit, whose power alone can transform the church and turn back the global tide of cultural enmity and systematized violence. One of the foundations for our own faith in our future is the solid work of renewal that has continued through decades of loss and diminishment and through a period of relative immaturity in dealing with new free-doms to dress, drive, reside, and relax as we chose. This renewal effort hungers for deeper prayer life while seek-ing more effective channels of action. This renewal effort calls for community bonds that will hold firm across dis-tances and separations. Once realized, it is communion, the ultimate grace of vowed life on earth. The unity we seek requires deliberate decisions like these, adaptable to our individual communities: ¯ To find common ground for all our ministries, individ-ual and communal, in the church's mission to transform social and economic structures of oppression into resources of human growth. This means conscious commitment to uncover and combat causes of the suffering we constantly work to alleviate. ¯ To create a community culture that is welcoming and visible to young women who may desire to live and work Review for Religious with us for varying periods of time as associates com-mitted to the gospel. This means opening certain con-vents to women of various ethnic and educational backgrounds willing to learn of our charism and mission without seeking a vowed life. ¯ To make of our community communications a min-istry (rather than simply sources of information), a min-istry that lets our various publics know that all our ministries are part of the broad mission of the church on earth. Admirable models of print and electronic media exist that show salaried personnel and volunteer workers dedicatedly pursuing the goals of the religious commu-nities that own or sponsor the various large or small institutions and initiatives. ¯ To seek new ways of bringing gospel values into the national conversation: new forms of education at all lev-els (like the Jesuits' Cristo Rey schools), or public lec-tures and dialogue inspired by the community's mission (like the Benedictines' Atchison Threshold or the Global Institute at Leavenworth's University of Saint Mary). This means collaborating imaginatively and being will-ing to take some risks. ¯ To seek collaborators among associates, alumni/ae, and other friends for ventures into the public arena that do not depend on financial support or common allegiances. This means engaging partners as Vincent de Paul and Louise de Marillac and other founders of apostolic con-gregations did, perfecting the art of bridge building between those with means and those without. ¯ To create offices of mission and ministry that assist sisters in transition or nearing retirement to discern where best to contribute their services, within commu-nity- sponsored institution( or in partnership with sisters and associates in other activities that can use their help. This may well mean active/retirement residences for the 64.~ 200~ Brinkman * Invisible ~ Even to Ourselves? mutual support of those more active and less active. If we energetically choose some paths like these to a renewed unity of mission and ministry in our communi-ties, a new visibility will surely follow. Notes t A case in point is John Fialka's Sisters: Catholic Nuns and the Making of America (St. Martin's Press) and Ken Woodward's review in the New York Times Book Review. 2 Sister Elizabeth Youngs SCL, "Between Alpha and Omega," Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth Report for the Sixteenth Chapter, June 2004, pp. 117-119. 3 Sister Sharon Smith SCL, "Associates Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth," in SCL Sixteenth Chapter, pp. 105-107. 4 Sister Sharon Smit,h SCL, "Vocation Ministry," in SCL Sixteenth Chapter, pp. 99-101. s Sister Mary Beth Minges SCL, "Initial Formation. 1998-2004," in SCL Sixteenth Chapter, pp. 102-104. 6 Conversation with Sister Erica Berg SCL, May 2004. 7 Report from Sister Constance Phelps SCL, community councilor 1998-2004, in SCL Sixteenth Chapter, pp. 16-25. ,Review for Religious DORIS GOTTEMOELLER Living in Community: Continuing the Conversation Scix years ago I published an article titled "Living in ommunity: Beginning the Conversation." In it I suggested that the unwillingness or inability of contem-porary religious congregations to discuss this aspect of our way of life may well be our Achilles' heel, the point of vulnerability that diminishes our integrity and threat-ens our future. The article included some definitions, theological underpinnings for community living, sup-portive spiritual practices, reflections on the role of lead-ership in creating and sustaining community, and some special challenges.1 The dozens of responses to this article that I received from readers in the United States and abroad convince me that I touched on a neuralgic point. I would say the responses fall into three categories: (1) Yes, you have touched on a vital topic, tell us what to do; (2) Yes, you have touched on a vital topic, but it is too late--we have lost too much to ever regain a commitment to commu- Doris Gottemoeller RSM last wrote for us in our 62.2 issue of 2003. Her address remains Catholic Healthcare Partners; 615 Elsinore Place; Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. 64.3 200Y Gottemoeller ¯ Living in Community nity living; and (3) No, you do not know what you are talking about; it is the wrong issue and the wrong premise. In these pages I would like to dialogue with these groups. "Tell Us What to Do" The first two groups affirm the significance of com-munity living, but seek direction for its revitalization, so I will respond to them together. Several authors offer helpful insights. In a talk given to the National Religious Vocation Conference Study Days in September 1999, Nancy Schreck OSF addressed "The forces that push us toward and pull us away from community.''2 She begins with the assumption that community involves persons living together in shared space with shared resources, not in order to re-create family relationships, but in order to create the possibility of a radical following of Jesus. She develops a force field analysis in which com-peting forces or energies impinge on the reality of com-munity. The driving forces that she identifies include cosmic awareness, the struggle with diversity, the need for prophetic witness, the action of the Spirit, the iden-tity of religious life, mission effectiveness, a new desire in the members, the desire of new members, and lim-ited resources. The forces that move against community include paradigm paralysis, U.S. mainstream culture, patriarchal influence, drift, lowest-common-denomina-tor performance, adjustments made in good faith, lack of need, lack of energy, community as an event, ability of members, public witness, the asceticism of personal growth, and participation in multiple communities. This is not the place to analyze these competing forces. They are, however, part of the ambiance of religious life today, and have to be taken into consideration in any effort to energize community living. Her article could be a won- Review for Religious derful starting point for a conversation in any local com-munity or congregation. Another analysis of the current reality comes from women religious under fifty in their newsletter Giving VOICE. The December 1999 issue addresses this topic in a number of thoughtful reflections) The editor, Jan Hayes RSM, reports that the editorial team received "an avalanche" of responses to the questions: How do you define community? Does it include communal living or doesn't it? VVhat is your experience of communal living? VV-hat is it that you bring to group living situ-ations? What is it that you need? Does communal liv-ing add to the vitality of the larger community or doesn't it? Is communal living still an integral part Do ,we findit~ helpful to compare' the loosening of communal bonds: in American society tO the ~ame phenomenon in 'women's ,religious life ? of religious life? Space precludes summarizing all of the excellent contributions on this issue, both in the articles and in the comments received from emails and letters to the editor. The overall tenor of the contributions, however, affirms the centrality of communal living to the sisters' understanding of their vocation and their desire to grow in this dimension of their life. The sociologist Mary Johnson SNDdeN addressed the issue in these pages in her article titled "Bowling Alone, Living Alone: Current Social Contexts for Living the Vows.''4 She responds to an article by Robert D. Putnam titled "Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital"S and to my earlier article. Putnam's the-sis is that there has been a .loosening of communal bonds across U.S. society in the last thirty years. His provoca- 64.3 2005 Gottemoeller ¯ Living in Community 272 five title comes from his observation that persons tend to bowl alone or in small groups today, rather than joining leagues, which require regular attendance. He has pre-sented this viewpoint in Vghite House conferences and national workshops and in other publications as well, and he has been quoted frequently. In Putnam's analysis, communal bonds, norms, and networks constitute "social capital" that facilitates coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit. He cites evidence of decline in religious involvement, labor-union membership, involvement in parent-teacher associations, and volunteering in civic, fraternal, and women's organizations like the Red Cross, the Boy Scouts, the Shriners, the Jaycees, and the League of Women Voters. He acknowledges that groups like the Sierra Club, the National Organization for Women, and the American Association of Retired Persons have seen a dramatic rise in membership in recent decades. But, as Johnson notes, while the political clout of these orga-nizations is considerable, the nature of involvement is vastly different from the organizations discussed previ-ously. Putnam says: "For the vast majority of their mem-bers (Sierra, NOW, AARP, and so forth), the only act of membership consists of writing a check for dues or per-haps occasionally reading a newsletter. Their ties, in short, are to common symbols, common leaders, and perhaps common ideals, but not to one another. From the point of view of social connectedness, the Environmental Defense Fund and a bowling league are just not in the same category." Similarly, Johnson adds, "a group of friends that meets quarterly, a prayer group that meets monthly, and a support group that meets weekly are just not in the same category as a c.ommunity that lives under the same roof and interacts daily." Johnson goes on to compare the loosening of communal bonds in American society to Review for Religious the same phenomenon in women's religious life. As evi-dence she cites research findings, funded by the Lilly Foundation, from a national survey of women who entered apostolic, monastic, and evangelical orders since 1965. Her data, based on responses from 70 percent of the women's institutes (whose membership constitutes 84 percent of the sisters in the United States), indicate that 69 percent of religious houses consist of one or two sisters. When asked "If you had your preference right now, with how many sisters would you prefer to live?" these post-Vatican II sisters responded as follows: with none (11%); with one other sister (14%), with two other sisters (12%); in a group of 4-7 sisters (45%); in a group of 8-10 sisters (6%); in a group of 11-15 sisters (2%); in a group of 16-20 sisters (4%); in a group of more than 20 sisters (6%). The gap between what sisters experience and what they would prefer is intriguing. No doubt the restrain-ing forces cited by Schreck above would help explain the disparity. There is much more in Johnson's article, but overall she believes that "the work of sharply defining and rebuilding community is essential to the mission and future of apostolic religious life in the United States and other nations where religious life struggles to free itself from the hegemonic hold of middle-class values." This probably summarizes the opinion of most of the respon-dents in this first group. Now to another viewpoint. "Wrong Issue, Wrong Premise" The most explicit argument is voiced by Barbara Fiand SNDdeN in Refocusing the Vision: Religious Life into the Future.6 In chapter 4 she differs strongly with Johnson and me (pp. 147-149). Citing both of our articles, she accuses us of a bias toward living together and a "high-handed" rejection of other experiences, saying that some- 64.3 2005 Gottemoeller ¯ Living in Community thing new is evolving from the grassroots which needs to be taken into consideration. Because of the diversity of living situations today, she says, "the whole tenor of what used to be called 'community living' has changed." She adds that the alleged desire of potential new members for residential community living needs to be probed fur-ther lest it be mistaken for an adequate reason for becom-ing a religious. Finally, she suggests that Johnson's bias toward community living prejudices her as a professional investigator. Fiand seems to believe--as do others with whom I have spoken--that promoting communal living today would be an example of restorationism, a regrettable regression into some prerenewal version of religious life. It is regarded as giving way to nostalgia, a selective mem-ory about the benefits and joys of living together. Nostalgia screens out, she says, the struggles and dys-functions that were part of the reality. In response I would suggest that to restore an earlier practice with a renewed understanding of its value and with suitable adaptation to changing circumstances can be a valuable retrieval. Others object to efforts to restore community living on historical grounds. They charge that women religious lived "in community" only because the hierarchical church imposed this on us. Or, similarly, they say that something which was essential to monastic life was inap-propriately required of evangelical and apostolic reli-gious life as well. This objection would require substantial historical research. Investigation would prob-ably show, for example, that the Council of Trent's effort to insist on cloister for women's religious orders was widely resisted, as much by bishops as by women them-selves, since the works entrusted to them required the ability to be out and among the people. Cloister or papal Review for Religious enclosure, of course, is not what today's supporters of communal living envision for their apostolic lives. Investigation would probably also show that various founders from the 16th century to the present have had different ideas about the significance and modality of community living, and so the research would need to make a congregation-by-congregation review. The most neuralgic point in any discussion of com-munity living is whether a congregation should express and promote any norms around living "in common," that is, in groups of two or more. The most helpful resource here is Sandra Schneiders IHM's treatment of the issue in Selling All: Commitment, Consecrated Celibacy, and Community in Catholic Religious Life.7 The premise and context of her discussion is life in a "mobile ministerial religious congregation." Her thesis is that community life, "an intrinsic and constitutive dimension of minis-terial religious life, is theologically necessary for all mem-bers of the congregation, but that it can be embodied on the personal level in a plurality of lifestyles, both group and individual, which are related to each other as equally valid variations, not as legitimate to aberration, normative to exceptional, or superior to inferior" (p. 350, italics added). Specifically, she discusses congregational group living. (pp. 317-330) and three varieties of indi-vidual living. She defines each and spells out the cir-cumstances which may prompt it and the major advantages and challenges each brings. The three forms of individual living are living singly (pp. 330-335), living alone (pp. 336-339), and living in solitude (pp. 339-349). The first is the case of someone who would not choose individual living, but is compelled to do so by educational, ministerial, or personal respon-sibilities (such as the care of aging parents). Vghen the circumstances change, persons in this category are likely 64.3 2005 Gottemoeller ¯ Living in Community 276t 7 ~ to return to group living. The second is the case of some-one who is self-marginalized, on a sort of exclaustration without going through the formalities. This is the per-son who probably has not been seen at a community event in anyone's memory. The third form of individual living is the case of per-sons who seek and choose solitude for their own spiritual development and psychological health. Schneiders describes them as neither alienated nor estranged, but deeply committed and actively involved, perhaps even holding congregational leadership posts. They are fully accountable to congregational leadership in regard to finances, ministry, and personal lifestyle; they are fre-quently involved in very demanding ministries; they are actively committed to the justice agenda. My observation about sisters in this third category is that they are the very persons with whom I would like to share community living and that, for every one of them who opts for solitary living, there is one less com-panion available to those who desire healthy group liv-ing. And so I do not agree with Schneiders that the choice to live individually is without consequence for the rest of the group, or that a norm favoring group liv-ing would be inappropriate. Each member's choice enlarges or diminishes options for others. The more often healthy and active sisters choose to live alone, the more the impression may be given that those who choose to live together are immature, dependent, and nonre-newed. Creating the Future What are some considerations for sisters who want to break through the hesitancy and silence that surround the issue of community living? Here are four sugges-tions. First, the venue for choice of a norm around com- Review for Religious munity living is the congregational chapter. By the very nature of what is involved--an authoritative interpreta-tion of the commitment to community--an individual sister or small group of sisters cannot be determinative. As with any norm, interpretations in specific cases and exceptions for specific individuals can be made by the leadership. This authority to interpret the Rule and to apply it in specific circumstances is one of the highest obligations of leadership. If done sensitively and consis-tently, it will build up the common good and respond to individual needs. Exceptions, then, will not detract from the clarity of the ideal embraced by the membership and the good-faith efforts to strive toward the ideal. Second, congregations will legitimately differ in their interpretation of their commitment. Their history, tra-ditions, and present circumstances may prompt some to choose the norm of living in common, others of living singly, and others of honoring individual choice. Clarity about what the normative interpretation of community is may lead to less diversity in lifestyle within a congre-gation and more diversity among congregations. This clarity should be valuable in describing a congregation to the larger church and to potential new members. Third, in discerning their choice around community living, each congregation should factor in how its choice influences its practice of poverty, of obedience, of celibacy, of prayer, and of ministry. Each of these ele-ments of religious life is meant to interact with the oth-ers to create a synergistic whole. How is a communal spirituality built up through the daily efforts of the mem-bers? How is the sharing of goods implied by poverty realized in practice? And so forth. In a way the manner of community living chosen creates a template for the realization of each of the other elements. The discern-ment should also project the possible impact of the 277 ¯ 64.3 2005 Gottemoeller ¯ Living in Community 278] choice into the future. What will be the possible impact of the congregation's present choice a generation from now? Fourth, the congregation's choice of a norm around community living must be supported by appropriate resources, both material and spiritual. If it is true that forty-five percent of sisters desire to live in groups of four to seven, and this is consistent with the congrega-tion's norm, then housing must be found to make that possible. The loss of parish convents is one of the factors that led to the drift into individual living, and apart-ments will seldom accommodate more than two people. Of course, the investment in living space requires a good-faith commitment on the part of groups to use the space. Congregational leadership has to invite and promote the dialogues that lead to these choices. Leaders .also have to make available other resources, such as materials for group prayer and ritual, occasional group facilitation, intervention in crisis situations, and a general climate of encouragement and support. The intention in pursuing this conversation is not to simplify what is a very complex issue, having historical, cultural, sociological, and theological dimensions. Nor is it to minimize the experience of anyone living religious life today. Rather, the purpose is to call attention to a principal dimension of religious life and to invite a cor-porate discernment. Few questions cut closer to the real-ity of a congregation's identity than its norm or lack of norm around community living. Attempts at dialogue are sometimes stalled by the prospect of choosing between ministry and community living, with the assumptions that members cannot be expected to bring energy to both and that ministry is to be preferred. A better perspective would be to view both ministry and community as equally valuable expressions Review for Religiozts of mission, each strengthening the other. The presence of adults living together in simplicity and harmony, shar-ing prayer, hospitality, and the duties and struggles of daily living, is an uncommon and striking witness to the power of the gospel and the dynamism of a congrega-tion's charism, so much so that it deserves to be called a prophetic stance. Six years ago I closed with the phrase that is the sub-title of the Vatican document on community, "The Love of Christ Gathers Us into Unity." This phrase captures the motive and dynamism of community life. Only the love of Christ is enough to support and sustain this way of life. Love attracts and gathers us. The process is never finished, always calling us to greater unity, greater gen-erosity, greater zeal. We will all fall short of this ideal, but it is one that will never be approached unless it is artic-ulated in behavioral expectations appropriate to a con-gregation's charism and mission. Notes ~ Review for Religious 58, no. 2 (March-April 1999): 137-149. See also my article "Community and Communion: Making the Connections," Review for Religious 60, no. 2 (March-April 2001): 139-151. 2 Horizon, Spring 2000, 7-15. 3 Giving VOICE 1, no. 3 (December 1999). Contributors include Denise Starkley OP, "Community: An Essential Part of Charism"; Rayleen Giannotti RSM, "A Common Life and a Vibrant Spirituality"; Janice Bader CPPS, "Commitment Grows through the 'Rubbing of Elbows'"; Debbie Wells CPPS, "Generation Xers in Community: A Cultural Expert--No Experience Necessary!"; and Kathy Wright SL, "Community ls for Mission." 4 Review for Religious 59, no. 2 (March-April 2000): 118-130. s Journal of Democracy 6, no. 1 (January 1995): 65-78. 6 Barbara Fiand SNDdeN, Refocusing the Vision (New York: Crossroad Publishing Co., 2001). 7 Sandra Schneiders IHM, Selling All, Vol. 2 of Religious Life in a New Millennium (New York: Paulist Press, 2001). 279 64.3 200Y Gottemoeller ¯ Living in Community Prayer: Psalm 122:1-3, 6-9 I rejoiced because they said to me, "We ~ill go up to the house of the Lord." And now we have set foot within your gates, O Jerusalem-- Jerusalem, built as a city with compact unity. Pray for the peace of Jerusalem! May those who love you prosper! May peace be within your walls, prosperity in your buildings. Because of my relatives and friends I will say " Peace be'within you!" Because of the house of the Lord, our God, I will pray for your good. Reflection and Discussion What is my personal experience of community support and sharing in our congregational vocation and charism? Religious community life mirrors the secular cultural breakdown of social groupings. Do we agree or disagree? If we agree, what kind of changes would we want to work for in religious life? What would be some "norms" that a religious congrega-tion might establish to support and sustain a healthy living "in common"? Review for Religiou~ MARY C. CARROLL With Love from Calcutta and Lisieux: Letters of Mother Teresa and St. Th~r~se When Father Michael van der Peet SCJ, A col-league of mine and seminary spiritual director, lectured on Mother Teresa of Calcutta, it was not just his reporting of particular facts but the heartfelt friendship he had with this remarkable woman that inspired me.~ Because of my com-pelling interest, Father shared the twenty let-ters he had received from Mother Teresa and spoke at length about their conversations and his continuing sense of her presence in his life. I was reminded of another friendship and the poignant letters exchanged between Maurice Barth~l~my-Belli~re, an aspiring seminarian, and Th6r~se of Lisieux. As he departed from France for the African missions, Maurice was deeply consoled by the assuring words of Th~r~se that somehow she would be with him. What is it that motivates and sustains such relationships? Mother Teresa wrote her letters in Mary C. Carroll SSSF is a professor and spiritual director at Sacred Heart School of Theology; .7335 South Highway 100; P.O. Box 429; Hales Corners, Wisconsin 53130. witnessing 64.3 2005 Carroll ¯ With Love from Calcutta and Lisieux 282 the midst of enormous travel demands, and Th~r~se of Lisieux wrote even when she was extremely ill. What is it that so strongly moves people to assist one another on the spiritual journey? Examining these two relationships may provide insight into Jesus' admonition to "abide in my love" (Jn 15:9). My purpose here is (1) to describe the origins of these two friendships, (2) to explore the contents of select letters and conversations, and (3) to share the wisdom of the relationships. Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Father Michael At a bus stop in Rome, Father Michael--a native of Holland and something of a world traveler himself-- noticed that the diminutive woman patiently waiting was Mother Teresa. Considering how rare such a respite must have been for her, he thought of giving her just a nod of recognition. But then he thought: "Here is a saint and I am a sinner. At least I can ask her to pray for me." Fortuitously the conversation that ensued included an invitation to give a talk to Mother's congregation, the Missionaries of Charity, in Rome. Arriving early and sitting in the chapel, Father Michael noticed the Ego Sum (I Am) on the tabernacle door. This became a prayer focus and filled him with a sense of "holy ground." This day concluded with another invitation, for a retreat. Mother requested continuing contact because, as she told him, "You kriow Jesus and you know us.''~ In her first letter Mother says: I would be grateful if I could turn to you for spiritual help, but I am absolutely too small and empty. Only Jesus can stoop so low as to be in love with one such as me. Pray for me--that "No" does not pass through my heart and lips---when Jesus asks. (Letter 1, 11/16/75) Because of traveling, Mother apologizes for a delay in her next letter; she assures Father Michael, however, that Review for Reli~ous a holy hour follows every Mass so that "I get the two hours with Jesus before people and sisters start using me. I let Him use me first" (Letter 2, 3/6/76). Several months later Mother is in New York and invites Father Michael to a private meeting, during which he suggests leaving after an hour. Mother's response is "No. The morning is for us, and the media don't know where I am." On. another occasion Father Michael raised a question: "Wherever you go, Mother, people con-sider you to be a heroine or saint. You received all those beautiful prizes. The Holy Father admires and praises you. You were the guest of Indira Gandhi, of Queen Elizabeth, and of President and Mrs. Reagan. How do you handle all of that?" She laughed and said: "Father, [pointing to her ear] it goes in here and comes out there. I am too small to contain it all. Jesus has given me a great grace, and that is the absoluteconviction that I am nothing without Him. If He could find a poorer woman than I, He would not choose me but He would choose that woman." This theme of "littleness" appears again in a letter: I want to write, but I have nothing to say, but that wonder at His great humility and my smallness--noth-ingness. I believe--this is where Jesus and I meet-- He is everything to me--and I--His own little one--so helpless--so empty--so small that all these things that people keep pouring at and round me, can-not enter within me. Maybe because of the darkness I do not see. Maybe He just wants it to be so. I let Him have His way. I smile at the cardboard box [referring "If He co ld find a poorer w man than!, He would noLchoose me but He would choose tha woman." 283 64.3 2005 Carroll * With Love from Calcutta and Lisieux 284[ to herself] getting filled--with all kinds of things-- Big things, most of which I do not understand, but I know that I am being used--only--for and by them so that they proclaim the presence of the Poor--and their concern for the poor. And so I accept everything with a smile in their name. (Letter 3, 5/29/76) In another letter the theme of an unconditional love-- despite the inexplicable darkness that encircles Jesus within her--is quite pronounced in the last paragraph: My love for Jesus keeps growing more simple and more I think personal. Like our Poor, I try to accept my poverty of being small, helpless, incapable of great love, but I want to love Jesus with Mary's love, and His Father with Jesus' love. I know you are praying for me. I want Him to be at ease with me--not to mind my feelings--as long as He feels alright--not to mind even the darkness that surrounds Him in me-- but that in spite of everything Jesus is all to me and that I love no one but only Jesus. (Letter 4, 6/19/76) Within a few months Mother is writing of Brother Roger of Taizd's presence in Calcutta and marveling at someone so full of God and willing to live right in the slums. She promises Father Michael more sharing when her table is "a little empty of letters" (Letter 5, 11/6/76). There is a specificity of issues--providence and faith-fulness- mentioned in the following letter. First Mother refers to their wonderful "chance" meeting in Rome. We have received much from accepting to meet-- without being consulted or prepared. I do not know how He does with you--but with me He always does so--just to make me realize His tender concern for me and my nothingness--His fullness and my empti-ness- His infinite Love and my childlike love. (Letter 6, 11/26/76) Then she addresses Father Michael's personal concerns: Review for Religious "Let not your infidelity and hesitancy as you say--pre-occupy you, but accept all that He gives and give what-ever He takes with a big smile. For this is holiness: to do His will with a big smile" (Letter 6, 11/26/76). But that smile is difficult for her too as she handles her celebrity status in a visit to the United States. "It was all one act of blind obedience. I began to understand the Stations of the Cross with a deeper meaning. The Police, the crowds, it all seemed as if Calvary was being re-enacted all over again" (Letter 6, 11/26/76). The significance of the Missionaries of Charity and the Eucharist are recurring themes as well. Mother is impressed by a priest who points out that God has to exist or else the MCs have "no meaning at all." She agrees, but adds that the essential source for this ministry is the meekness and humility of Jesus: To be able to eat the Bread of Life--we need meekness and humility--if we want to feed Him in the hungry one. I would be happy if you [Father Michael] wrote about the hunger of man and the Bread of Life, the hunger of God and the Hungry One in the distressing disguise of the Poor. (Letter 6, 11/26/76) Regarding hours of adoration, Mother confides, "Here lies our strength and our joy." She concludes: "I ask you to tell Jesus--when at your wordwthe bread becomes His Body and wine becomes His Blood--to change my heart, give me His own Heart so that I can love Him as He loves me" (Letter 6, 11/26/76). Within the year, Mother makes a similar plea with deep affection: "My prayer is very close to you. I do hope you will keep me close to you in your prayer--and love Jesus for me, for all the times when my heart is cold and empty" (Letter 7, 6/20/77). A short time later Father Michael is planning an extended time of reflection and Mother has some pas-toral words for him: 64.3 200~ Carroll ¯ With Love from Calcutta and Li~'eux It is just like you to ask to spend the [three] 3 months with Jesus alone, but if during this time the hunger for Jesus in hearts of His people is greater than yours for Jesus you should not remain alone with Jesus for all the time. You must allow Jesus to make you bread to be eaten by all those you come in touch with. Let the people eat you up--by the Word and presence you proclaim Jesus. (Letter 8, 2/17/78) She then lays out a tentative plan for her scheduled time in St. Louis: I wish you would be there. We could--maybe have Adoration every day and so bring . . . our lives [together] with the Bread of Life. No greater love, not even God could give than in giving Himself as Bread of life to be broken to be eaten so that you and I may eat and live, may eat and satisfy our hunger for love--and He seemed yet not satisfied for He too was hungry for love, so He made Himself the Hungry One, the Thirsty One, the Naked One, the Homeless [One]. (Letter 8, 2/17/78) Mother claims that she can understand Jesus' majesty because He is God, but "His humility is beyond my understanding because He makes Himself the Bread of Life so that even a child as small as I can eat Him and live." In further reflection on the Eucharist, she recalls an awesome memory: Some days back, when giving Holy Communion to our Sisters in the Mother House, suddenly I realized I was holding God between my [two] 2 fingers. The greatness of [the] humility of God. Really no greater love--no greater love than the love of Christ. You, I am sure must feel often like that when, at your word ¯. the [b]read becomes the Body of Christ, the wine becomes the Blood of Christ. (Letter 8, 2/17/78) Her closing comment is characteristic: "He [Jesus] Review for Religious can do with me just as it pleases Him without even a thought of consoling me. I iust want to be His own lit-tle one, if He so wants. Otherwise I will be happy to be just Nothing and He everything" (Letter 8, 2/I 7/78). After more than a year's lapse, a subsequent letter includes an apology for a "long silence." She refers to the Silver Jubilee celebration since, with the foundation in Beirut, twenty-five tabernacles are established in MC houses around the world. With reference to the Eucharist, she again ponders the ineffable: "I just under-stand less and less the humility of God-made-man for love of us" (Letter 9, 5/30/79). A few months later, at the time of the congregational chapter, Mother makes a request: "Ask Our Lady to take care of our Society, which was born at her pleading and grew under her care. I would love to be just a simple Sister. I will not ask--let Jesus do whatever He wills without con-suiting me, for I belong to Him" (Letter 10, 9/22/79). She also offers an apology for leaving Father Michael and oth-ers at a profession in New York to join Cardinal Terence Cooke in meeting with the boat people: "The sea has become an open Calvary where the Passion of Christ is being relived . You only wonder how people can suffer so much and never break. Looking at them I feel physical pain right in my heart" (Letter 10, 9/22/79). Mingled with joy in the expanding congregation, the letter contains signs of a dark night of the soul: "As for me, the silence and the emptiness is so great that I look and do not see, listen and do not hear. The tongue moves but does not speak. Helpless yet daring." Mother asks for prayer so that "I let Him have a free hand and even if He chooses to cut me to pieces that every single piece, however small, be only His." Mother ends with "Ask Our Lady to take care of me as she took [care] of Jesus" (Letter 10, 9/22/79). 64.3 2005 Carroll ¯ With Love from Calcutta and Lisieux 288 There is a postmark from Rome on the next letter. "A bishop told me that I will spend my Purgatory in writing letters, because I am so bad in answering" is her opening statement. Even so, she claims that, "however long Purgatory may be, there is the beautiful hope of seeing Jesus, one day." Her delay is, to some extent, due to her presence at a synod. She expresses amazement to be "with all the big people of Church" (Letter 11, 10/18/80). At the synod Mother requests that the bishops and the Holy Father "give us holy Priests." She then reflects on Father Michael's priesthood: "How tenderly Jesus must love you as to use your tongue to change [b]read into the Body of Christ and through your absolution take away the sins, wash the sins with His precious Blood." Mother is delighted that soon "we shall have Priest-Co-workers." She closes with "Let us keep the joy of loving Jesus in our hearts and share this joy with all we meet" (Letter 11, 10/18/80). During the next decade Mother's letters are less fre-quent but, with reference to Father Michael's corre-spondence, she repeats, "They are my strength" (Letter 12, 12/29/82). Upon returning from Ethiopia she somberly says, "I only saw an open Calvary, where the Passion of Christ was being relived in the bodies of crowds and crowds of people." She hopes, however, to send more sisters to be Jesus' gentle presence to them (Letter 13, I/1/1985). "Often I have wanted to write, but not knowing where you are--it was [a] good excuse not to write" is one of the opening lines of her next letter. With so much poverty around the world, the three hundred and fifty MC houses in seventy-seven countries console her. In her imaginative way she says: St. Peter must be wondering what is happening in the homes of the MC's, as each one who dies in our homes Review for Religious goes to heaven with a ticket for St. Peter. [Twenty-three] 23 thousand have died with us only in Calcutta out of the 53,000 that we had picked up dying from the streets. Same is happening in New York. Already [fifty] 50 have died a beautiful death . At the begin-ning St~ Peter would not let me enter Heaven, because there were no slums in Heaven. Now Heaven is full of slum people. Jesus must be very happy to have those thousands coming to Him with love from Calcutta. (Letter 14, 1/1/88) Although there is a short typed note expressing grat-itude, the last hand-written letter arrives in March 1992. Mother repeats an earlier refrain, "Your letter brought me great joy that you still remember me and pray for me after such a long time." She is happy with an expanding congregation but hopes that the "Society remains only all for Jesus through Mary" (Letter 17, 3/3/92). Then, until Mother's death in 1997, the notes are short and typed but her spirit comes through, especially in the final letter: "God's blessings be on you as you continue to satiate the burning Thirst of Jesus." The last line concludes with "Please, pray for our Society and for me that we may not in any way spoil the works of love" (Letter 20, 3/10/97). In reflecting on his experience, Father Michael mea-sures each word as he says, "With her, you inhale God's presence." Mother's decorum is not "pietistic or exag-gerated." There is a flow of "something genuine, natu-ral, and spontaneous." At the ceremony for the beatification of Mother Teresa, Father Michael watched carefully at the unveiling of her picture and with grati-tude said in his heart, "There is my friend." In the years that have followed since her death, Father Michael says, "She has never been far from me." Whereas Father Michael and Mother Teresa met numerous times and exchanged over fifty letters, Maurice 289 64.3 2005 Carroll ¯Witb Love from Calcutta and Lisieux 290 Belli~re and Th~r~se of Lisieux never met, and exchanged only twenty-one letters. Nevertheless, their correspondence also provides a rich dynamic of a grow-ing friendship. Let us now turn to the genesis of that relationship and some excerpts from Th~rEse's letters. Thdri~se of Lisieux and Maurice Barth~l~my-Bellii~re Like Father Michael van der Peet, Maurice Belli~re --a twenty-one-year-old French ~eminarian--reached out for someone to pray for him by writing to a Carmelite convent. Mother Agnes of Jesus, Th~r~se's older sister Pauline, received the letter in which Maurice introduced himself with the words, "The grace of God, which impelled me toward the Sanctuary, has not washed away the last traces of a thoughtless life., and in spite of my efforts I have a hard time absorbing the spirit of the Church and holding myself to all the demands of the seminary rule." 3 Subsequently, while in the mundane surroundings of a laundry room, Pauline asked Th~r~se to become a spir-itual sister to Maurice by praying for him. Th~r~se was delighted, and, although they never met, thus began a significant friendship manifested in the letters exchanged, largely during the last year of her life. When Maurice Belli~re sent his first letter to the Carmel of Lisieux, he was desperate because his manda-tory military service was interrupting his seminary stud-ies and it could negatively affect his vocation. Within a week Pauline assured Maurice that a "little saint" would be praying for him. His next letter is quite idealistic, for he does not want to come back from military service "without bringing some souls back to the true Light." En route to the barracks in Caen, he drops off a postcard recommending prayer for the seminarian-soldiers and their saddened families. Review for Religious It is another nine months before Maurice sends a let-ter revealing a man, fresh from the seminary, whose per-sonal confidence in his ideals have been severely challenged. What exactly happened in the army is mys-terious; obviously, Maurice is disillusioned. He writes again, to the new prioress, Mother Gonzague, who turns the correspondence over to Th~r~se. With alacrity and sisterly concern, Th~r~se responds and soon learns that Maurice--having finished his military stint and returned to his religious pursuits--is now anxiously awaiting acceptance in the Missionaries of Africa (White Fathers). Excerpts from Th~r~se's first letter (December 26, 1896) are full of encouragement for the aspiring missionary: Let us work together for the salvation of souls. We have only the one day of this life to save them and thus to give Our Lord some proof of our love. The tomorrow of this day will be eternity, when Jesus will reward you with the hundredfold of those sweet and lawful joys which you are giving up for Him . I hope, Monsieur l'Abb~, that you will continue to pray for me, who am no angel as you seem to think, but a poor little Carmelite who is very imperfect--yet who in spite of her poverty wants, like yourself, to work for the glory of God. Thtr~se includes some of her poems. Maurice is grateful, apologizing for his "rough and ready" prose but saying he feels that something in her communication is working in the depths of his soul. Th~r~se responds with equal gratitude: "Truly, only in heaven will you know how dear you are to me. I feel our souls are made to understand each other." In this same letter Th~r~se articulates her "little way" by saying: "Since He Himself has chosen me to be your sis-ter, I hope that He will not take notice of my weakness, or rather that He will use that very weakness to do His work: 29i 64.3 200~ Carroll ¯ With Love from Calcutta and Lisieux 2921 for the Strong God likes to show His power by making use of nothing." Th~r~se has lofty desires that can be accomplished by being the "small flower" in the apostolic garden. For Thdr~se, the Divine One is not giving awards to the competent but rewards to the humble who are con-fident in Him, It is not entitlement but instrumentality. There is an increasing intimacy in Thdr~se's saluta-tion in the next letter. "My dear little Brother" replaces the formal "Monsieur l'Abb&" Fearing an overestima-tion of her person, she says, "I beg you to believe me that the good God has given you as your sister not a great soul." But she hastens to add: "Don't think that this is humility which prevents me from recognizing the gifts of the good God. I know that He has done great things in me, and every day I sing to Him with joy for doing so." Her motivation has also crystallized. "I under-stood my mission was not to crown a mortal king, but to make the King of Heaven loved, to conquer for Him the kingdom of hearts." Just months before her death, Thdr~se takes advan-tage of the privacy afforded her in the infirmary to answer Maurice's letters. She makes it clear that she is facing the end and assumes that, when he receives her letter, she will have left this "land of exile." There seems to be a sense of urgency when she says, "I would like to tell you a thousand things which I understand as I stand at the door of Eternity." One thing is clear: "I under-stand more than ever that only one thing is necessary, and that is to work solely for Him." A month later Thdr~se says, "The Spouse is at the door." Facing her own demise, she wants Maurice to know that their relationship will continue. "When my dear lit-tle brother leaves for Africa, I shall follow him not only in thought and in prayer; my soul will be with him for-ever." But Maurice is devastated when he understands Review for Religious that TMr~se's days are numbered, for he has found "a lovely home" in her friendship. He lets her know that she has been instrumental in his finding Jesus. Maurice soon expresses his anxieties and moral weak-ness. Thdr~se uses the image of an elevator of love, not fear, that takes us to God. She gives the exam-ple of two children who are disobedient. One withdraws in fright, but the other throws himself into their father's arms to beg forgiveness. Thdr~se promises to help Maurice remedy his hesitancy with God. "I think it will be easier for you to live with Jesus once I am there at His side forever." Thdr~se knows she must wait for the next life to further converse on these profound realities. In Thdr~se's last letter she speaks of knowing that her passport for heaven is ready and credits her deceased father for the grace of that awareness. Once again she assures Maurice that, whatever his faults, he is .dealing with the infinite mercy of God. She closes with: "ADieu, dear little brother, may God give us the grace to love Him and to save souls for Him." In the meantime Maurice is on board a ship destined for Africa. He recalls looking up at the stars and praying for Thdr~se, unaware it was the night she died. His first day in Africa is Thdr~se's first day in eternity. Later he is convinced that his peacefulness and joy are attributable to her. If today one goes to Maurice's grave, there is a plaque on the wall of the nearby church acknowledging this relationship: Maurice Belli~re, Spiritual Brother and Protdgd of Saint Th4r~se. A Dieu, dear littlebrother, may God give us the grace to love Him and to save soulsfor Him," 1293 64.3 2005 Carroll * With Love from Calcutta and Lisieux 294 Summary Observations These two women--sending letters permeated with affection, gratitude, and insights--gifted both Father Michael van der Peet and Maurice Barth~l~my-Belli~re. Mother Teresa's themes are more broadly based: retreat requests, Eucharistic insights, concern for an expanding congregation, global poverty, and a thirst for God whet-ted by an acute spiritual darkness that seem to hollow her out for a greater fullness of Jesus' presence. In each MC house she had the phrase "I thirst" given a prominent place as a reminder of Jesus' longing for souls, and per-haps as a reflection of her own longing for God. Th~r~se and Maurice were in their twenties and fer-vently idealistic. Th~r~se articulates the "little way" to accompany her dreams. She uses the face of Jesus and the phrase "King of Hearts" to focus her image of her Beloved. There is immediacy in Th~r~se's writing because it is penned as she stands at the door of death while whispering secrets to Maurice. Although cloistered in life, she promises that in eternity she will travel with him as a spiritual companion. Both women view themselves as God's instruments: a cardboard box, an insignificant flower. In life, many know similar images of themselves and reluctantly accept them, but these women rejoice in them. Both knew they are not sources, only conduits, of love. Both women say to their friends what John the Baptist once said: "He must increase, and I must decrease" (Jn 3:30). But, most especially, both women testify to a divine indwelling through Jesus that makes true friendship possible. "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; abide in my love" (Jn 15:9). Notes ~ Father Michael van der Peer, a member of the international Congregation of the Priests of the Sacred Heart (SCJ), served on the Review for Religious commission for the beatification of Mother Teresa of Calcutta. He has graciously given me permission to quote from her letters and has answered numerous questions. Further resources regarding her expe-rience with spiritual direction are J. Neuner SJ, "Mother Teresa's Charism," and Albert Huart SJ, "Mother Teresa: Joy in the Night," Review for Religious 60 (September-October 2001): 479-493 and 494- 502 respectively. 2 Words quoted here and below (whether Mother Teresa's or Father Michael's), if not otherwise documented, are from my interviews with Father van der Peet. 3 Patrick Ahern, Maurice and Tberese: The Story of a Love (New York: Doubleday, 1998), p. 15. Below, other quotations longer than three words are from the following pages of this book: 25, 65-66, 82 and 86, 82, 103 and 108, 104-I05, 106, 130, 129-130, 152 and 155, 153,188, and 211. At Cana Before time was, She was in God's eye, As a bloom in the bud Awaits its moment. And the moment, too, Was in God's eye, That sees and saves, Counts hairs on heads, Yet defers to her, Her.unspoken wish Already his command. Leonard Cochran OP 64.3 2005 MARY FRANCES COADY Alfred Delp SJ and the Heart of Jesus 296 O n the first day of December 1944, a thirty-seven- year-old Jesuit, imprisoned in Berlin and awaiting trial for treason against the Third Reich, edged himself between the plank bed and table of his small cell and with manacled hands began to write a reflection on the Heart of Jesus. His name was Alfred Delp, and he had been arrested four months earlier in an all-out purge following a failed attempt on Hitler's life the previous July. He had been interrogated and tortured. In letters smuggled out of prison by two women who brought clean laundry and other supplies to prisoners, he had written about his fear, his struggles against despair, his optimistic hopes for acquittal and release, and his desire to leave his fate in the hands of God. The date, 1 December, that he began putting his meditation to paper is significant, for as the day dawned he realized it was the first Friday of the month, the day honoring the Heart of Jesus. This devotion held a cen- Mary Frances Coady published With Bound Hands, about Father Delp, at Loyola Press in 2003. She writes from 35 Cowan Avenue; Toronto, Ontario; M6K 2N1 Canada. tral place in Delp's prayer life. The veneration of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, with its deep biblical roots, had grown to enormous popularity with the revelations to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque in the late 17th century. This obscure Visitation nun received visions of Jesus in the chapel of her convent in the town of Paray-le- Monial, in Burgundy. In these visions Jesus exposed his heart to her, saying, "Behold my heart, which burns with love for all humanity." He added that those who received Communion for nine consecutive first Fridays in repa-ration for sins against his love were assured of dying in the state of grace. In the following centuries and under Jesuit influence, the Sacred Heart devotion ushered in a new and more gentle approach to the Christian spiritual life--one of self-abandonment, trust, and surrender--as a means of combatting the cold, harsh spirit of Jansenism that had permeated the church. The Litany of the Heart of Jesus was given official church approval in 1891. Along the way, however, the devotion became encrusted with infe-rior art, sugary sentimentality, and obsessive supersti-tions regarding the nine first Fridays. Alfred Delp, the product of a Catholic-Lutheran mar-riage, grew up without Catholic devotions because his father insisted he be brought up a Lutheran. The Sacred Heart caught up with him, however, after his adolescent embrace of his mother's Catholicism and his subsequent entrance into the Society of Jesus in 1926. A book of Jesuit devotions, one of which was the Litany of the Sacred Heart, was sent to him in prison. Delp had studied philosophy and political theory, but his prayer life as a Jesuit had been fashioned by the Catholic piety of the time. As a preacher and writer, he had tried to infuse his philosophical work with his deep-ening sense of the divine mystery at the core of his devo- 64.3 2005 298 tions. On the first Friday of December, in his cold prison cell, his hands in manacles, he pondered the love of God as the driving force of the universe. In the extremity of his situation, he realized the immensity of God's love for him, that God was holding him and protecting him with a love that was infinitely greater and more powerful than the forces imprisoning him. And so he began to write his meditation on the Litany of the Heart of Jesus. The heart represents the essence, or center, of a per-son, and he had earlier written of the heart as the only way to God. Now, in a preamble to his meditation, he lamented the dissociation of the devotional from the the-ological. Without a theological foundation, he wrote, the devotion can dissolve into mush, and without the devotion the theology becomes dry and devoid of personal passion. He described the arc that moves between the divine and the human: the basis of this devotion is the cry of the creature in need and the offer of help from God through Jesus Christ. The answer from God takes two forms: a healing, redemptive help and a call for humanity to share in that healing. And so this is not a just a "me and God" approach to the heart of Jesus, but a proposal to be a graced presence for others as well. The language used in the prayer is the language of love, but the theological framework is there. The prayer expresses a deep, myste-rious relationship between God and humanity, he wrote, and must not be demeaned by sentimentality. As with other litanies, the Litany of the Heart of Jesus follows an antiphonal course; the response "Have mercy on us" follows each of the various titles attributed to Jesus. What follows is my translation of an excerpt from Delp's reflection on the first invocation: "Heart of Jesus, Son of the eternal Father." "We call upon the Heart of the Son of the eternal Father. In this invocation there are particular consider- Review for Religious ations for us to contemplate. Heart: here, as in the whole litany, we are calling upon the love of God. The Heart is the symbol of God's innermost being and God's fun-damental relationship with us. A person who does not believe in God in this way should not continue praying, because that person is not up to the words of the prayer. "Heart of the Son: one ought to be able to state briefly what theology has to say about the Son. But one thing should be men-tioned as far as this devo-tion is concerned: from the beginning, the Son is the place of comfort and belonging for the world. The Word is God's image, of which we are shadows. He has always been the living incarnation of God's commitment to the worl

Issue 46.5 of the Review for Religious, September/October 1987. ; REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS (ISSN 0034-639X), published every two months, is edited in collaboration with the faculty members of the Deparlment of Theological Studies of St. Louis University. The editorial offices are located at Room 428; 3601 Lindell Blvd.; St. Louis, MO. 63108-3393. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS is owned by the Missouri Province Educational Institute of the Society of Jesus, St. Louis, MO. ©1987 by REWEW FOR RELtG~OtJS. Single copies $2.50. Subscriptions: U.S.A. $11.00 a year; $20.00 for two years. Other countries: add $4.00 per year (surface mail); airmail (Book Rate): $18.00 per year. For subscription orders or change of address, write: REVIEW FOR RELI(;IOUS: P.O. Box 6070; D~luth, MN 55806. Daniel F.X. Meenan, S.J. Dolores Greeley, R.S.M. Iris Ann Ledden, S.S.N.D. Richard A. Hill, S.J. Jean Read M. Anne Maskey, O.S.F. Editor Associate Editor Review Editor Contributing Editor Assistant Editors September/October, 1987 Volume 46 Number 5 Manuscripts, books for review and correspondence with the editor should be sent to Rt:wEw voR Rt:Lmu)us; Room 428; 3601 Lindell Blvd.; St. Louis, MO 63108-3393. Correspondence about the department "Canonical Counsel" should be addressed to Richard A. Hill, S.J.; J.S.T.B.; 1735 LeRoy Ave., Berkeley, CA 94709. Back issues and reprints should be ordered from REVIEW t'OR REI.I(:IOUS; Room 428; 3601 Lindell Blvd.; St. Louis, MO 63108-3393. "Out of print" issues and articles not published as reprints are available from University Microfilms International; 300 N. Zeeb Rd.; Ann Arbor, M1 48106. A major portion of each issue is also available on cassette recordings as a service for the visu-ally impaired. Write to the Xavier Society for the Blind; 154 East 23rd Street; New York, NY 10010. What Do the Laity Expect of Religious Life Guzm6n Carriquiry This article was prepared for the USIG (International Union of Superiors General) and originally appeared in the USIG Bulletin (no. 73, 1987). It is reprinted here with permission. Dr. Carriquiry, a native of Uruguay, is married and father of four. He is head of the Pontifical Council for the Laity and a professor at the Pontifical University Urbaniana. Two Remarks and a Propitious Occasion '~(ou have proposed and requested a very difficult task. Probably I accepted it with a considerable lack of awareness. Preparing for this meeting, I was able to realize the predicament in which I had placed myself. I am not a theologian by profession and even less an expert on the theology of religious life. I have had to read and reflect a good deal on the theme, but even so, I feel very inadequate in facing such a delicate question. I will limit myself, therefore, t.o giving some impressions, reflections and challenges, without any pretense at having a profound penetration into the "mystery" of the religious life. I would like to make a second remark., through a concern for hon-esty. "What do the laity expect. ?" is the question. When we speak of "laity," however, we are referring to many different people. It is good to suspect, or at times to smile at, those who with an excessive fa-cility and pretension claim to be "representatives" of the laity (or of youth, or of the poor, or of women . . .). We are tempted to dress our-selves in plumed clothing in order to hide our nakedness and to give our-selves a better or stronger "image." I am going to answer the question-- What do the laity expect. ? knowing that there will be much that is 641 1542 / fleview for Religious, September-October, 1987 personal to this individual layman, to this poor Christian, as a result of his own journey, experience and convictions. The fact of working in the Pontifical Council for the Laity for many years, however, has placed me in a privileged situation because if one wishes to serve the participation of the laity in the life and mission of the Church effectively--which is the competency of this Dicastery--then it is necessary to listen to and follow with special attention the sensitivities, demands, needs and ex-periences which are part of this multifaceted lay world. I hope to be able to transmit some of this rich experience to you. If, however, there are two evident limitations to this contribution, there is no doubt that it comes at an opportune and propitious moment in the life of the Church. We are in the time between the recent past extraordinary Synod--a commemoration, verification and actualization of Vatican Council II twenty years after its conclusion--and the next ordinary Synod of 1987, which will have as its theme "The vocation and mission of the laity in the Church and in society." The relations between laity and religious are adequately clarified by the knowledge the Church has at present of its mystery of communion and of the demands of i(s mission. And all, bish-ops, priests, deacons, religious and laity--as is stated in the final mes-sage of the extraordinary Synod--are invited to participate in the work of preparation for the next Synod, which "should constitute a decisive step so that all Catholics might receive the grace of Vatican II." From an Ecclesiology of Communion We can begin from an obvious daily experience. Many walls of sepa-ration- material, cultural, ecclesiastical--have been torn down, and to-day a close, simple, fraternal experience of collaboration between the la-ity and religious is lived and shared. This occurs within the most diverse Christian communities, in the most varied works of the Church, in asso-ciations and movements, in structures of "communion and participa-tion" of the combined pastoral team of the local Churches . It is like an immediate, accessible, verified evidence of fraternal collaboration and of common participation. No one can deny it. It can be stated that this is like a reflection and a fruit, a sign and a realization of the "ecclesiology of communion" of Vatican Council II. This I give here as something taken for granted. I find it interesting to point out a double movement, indivisible, in the carrying out of this con-ciliar ecclesioiogy. On one hand, we have gradually gone beyond a cor-porate or governmental division between clergy, religious and laity, com-partmentalized and sometimes in tension or in struggle for the division Expectations of Religious Life / 643 of "power" in the Church. What is anterior and interior to any dis-tinction has been affirmed and accented in this developing movement; that is, what is more essential, common to all, more original and radical in all Christian life. We are members of the great family of the "Chris-tian faithful," incorporated into Christ by baptism, participants in his priesthood, called to holiness, with equal dignity in the eyes of God, all co-responsible for the communion and the mission of the Church. But all "in their own way" because, at the same time, we experience that we are distinct, that this unity of all does not reduce us to uniformity and impoverish us by it, but that it develops fruitfully in the diversity of vo-cations, ministries and charisms which express and enrich the commun-ion and mission of the Church. It is with this ecclesiological basis and in intense ecclesial experience that we pose the question of what the laity expect of religious life . The Laity Expect "Something More" In the first place, I believe that many lay people would be surprised and somewhat disconcerted with the question, unable to respond in a con-scious and well-planned way. However, I think that, instinctively, in-tuitively, their response would be that of expecting "something more" of religious. Yes, they expect something more! Something more radical, more total, more definitive, more profound, more demanding and chal-lenging, in the relationship with God. They expect something more of holiness. In giving this spontaneous response, I pictured the alert, concerned, astonished reaction of the sister who says: "but, Dr . are not the laity also called to sanctity? . . ." And she says something obviously true if considered in the light of present ecclesial self-knowledge, but not so obvious in the understanding of all Christians. That conventional and arbitrary prejudice which seems to reserve holiness to the religious state, judging it in some way the monopoly of the following of Christ or of the evangelical counsels--has been gradually abandoned, and yet, at the same time, the lay condition was often considered a second-class Chris-tian life, a concession to human weaknesses. Ai times, the ideal of holi-ness was seen as a heroic and somewhat "aristocratic" option of per-fection, attained through the initiative of superior men and women. But, be at peace; good sister, because in ever greater numbers, the laity are becoming conscious of this universal vocation to holiness to which Chapter 15 of Lumen Gentium refers in a clear and distinct man-ner. 644 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 This being accepted, perhaps you still remain disturbed that the laity continue expecting from religious a greater radicality of commitment and donation to God (the three vows are like dimensions of a unique vow--I read this some days ago--of the vow of one's whole self, the gift of the entire person, offering oneself to God with all one's energies.); they expect a greater, more immediate and more total liberty and availability in order to follow-imitate-serve Christ; they expect a more direct and tan-gible referenceto the presence of the mystery of God in human life. They are very sure of what they expect even though they cannot always ex-press it well. For this reason, the ordinary lay person is much more exi-gent in observing and in judging the witness given by religious than that given by lay people. In general, this is so. It is surprising that this ex-pectation- which rises up from the "sensum fidei," from this "super-natural instinct" of simple Christians--corresponds perfectly to what the Church considers the radical originality of the religious life: to give wit-ness to and "impulse" in the area of the growth of life, of sanctity. Con-sciously or intuitively, the laity expect that religious will keep as a high priority the primacy, the radicality of the witness to sanctity, not as .a,pat-rimony or goal exclusively their own, but as a call and warning, a chal-lenge and attraction for all the members of the people of God toward this vocation and program of life. It is right that religious should be a bit disturbed when they feel them-selves burdened with such expectations because they feel that it is not. a question of a privilege but of a grave responsibility. In other words, there is a preferential love of God for each one of you--it was he who chose you first and who put his "aspiration" in you, and not you your-selves who decided to be more holy--which burdens you with responsi-bility in the response to God in the Church, I would say before the most "insignificant" of the baptized . . . and even before the most "care-less" of human beings. And it is not sufficient to p~ut on the habit~t~) say, "Lord, Lord." This vocation must be carried out effectively as the will of the Father. Saints or Reformers? In the long history of the Church one can find strong confirmation of what the laity today expect of the religious life. They expect what the Church has always expected, an assurance that they will never be de-prived of this "special gift" which is the religious life. Almost two mil-lennia of life teach that the crucial periods or phases of renewal of the Church--in its communion and in its mission--were brought about and' carried out through the great and liberated energies of holiness, and that Expectations of Religious Life / 645 in the "vanguard" of these holy and reforming energies the numerous and diverse charisms of the religious life proved powerful and fruitful. Let us have a bird's eye view of all this. - When the Church lived under the tension of the seducing powers of "worldliness" on the one hand and of vigorous heretical movements on the other, during the Roman-Christian Empire, the tradition of con-secrated life, of which the first witnesses are already met within the New Testament writings, flowered in the monastic experience, raising up a new spiritual "oxygenation," a passion for unity and a lively responsi-bility for the truth. - Shortly,afterwards, when Ambrose saw "the end of the world" in the total destruction of the Roman Empire of the West and before the invasion of the "barbarians," there came the charism of a Benedict-- as well as of Cyril and Methodius--whose cloistered disciples and fol-lowers would be nothing less than the evangelizers of the new peoples and the principal protagonists of the construction of a new civilization, medieval Christianity. - When the liberty of the Church was being strangled in the suffo-cating and corrupting embrace of feudal chains, currents of sanctity ra-diating from Cluny and Cister made possible the Gregorian reform and a sort of "second evangelization" of medieval Christianity. - And before the upheaval of the urban-mercantile-university revo-lution of the later medieval period--when the sectarian phenomena were swarming like so many devious responses to new sensitivities and cul-tural demands which went beyond the limits of the feudal "order"-- God enriched the communion and mission of the Church with the men-dicant orders for the most incisive and suitable evangelization of the new world and the new culture in process of being born. - And how is it possible to speak of the "Catholic reform" at the moment of the Council of Trent in face of the drama and challenge of the "Protestant reform" and the new missionary needs created by the European expansion at the dawn of modem times without considering the holy charisms of Ignatius, Teresa of Avila, Philip Neri, Angela Merici, Francis de Sales, Vincent de Paul. ? - In the second half of the nineteenth century, the intellectual, spiri-tual and missionary revival of the Church, harassed by the impetus of the secularizing and anti-clerical modernism, had its strong point in the multiplication of religious orders, masculine and feminine, which it would take too long to mention . 646 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 This is a mere schematic outline, certainly, but substantially true in what I wish to demonstrate. Speaking to Superiors General, after hav-ing mentioned the names of great and holy founders, John Paul II con-cluded: All these names testify that the paths of holiness, to which the members of the people of God are called, passed and continue to pass in great part through religious life. And there is no need to marvel at that, given the fact that religious life was founded on the most precise "prescription" for holiness, constituted by love lived according to the evangelical coun-sels. Also, mentioning two essential criteria for the renewal of religious life, the Pope said during his trip to Brazil: The first criterion is that religious life (and concretely every religious community) is not seriously renewed if the objective of the renewal is, in fact, the seeking of the greatest ease and convenience, but only if this objective is the seeking of what is most authentic in religious life and most harmonious with it. The second criterion is that religious life is re-newed by being ever more a road of sanctity. This is nothing else than what is stated by the conciliar decree Per-fectae Caritatis in Number 21. All this brings to mind a marvelous reminder of John Paul II to the laity, when he celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the conciliar de-cree Apostolicam Actuositatem in November, 1985: The Church needs great currents, movements and testimonies of holi-ness among the Christian faithful because it is from holiness that all authentic renewal of the Church is born, all enrichment of the intelli-gence of faith and of the following of Christ, a vital and fruitful re-actualization of Christianity in meeting with human needs, renewed forms of presence in the heart of human existence and in the culture of the nations. More than "reformers," the Church needs saints--frequently re-peats the Pope because saints are the best reformers. And this is the same point stressed by all the participants in the recent extraordinary Synod. Twenty years after the end of Vatican Council II the "univer-sal vocation to sanctity" must have the primacy. Between Crises and Hopes Well. twenty years after the end of Vatican Council II, that great gift of God to the Church of our times, in this crucial phase of renewal of the Church. how does it appear to you? Are religious in the van- Expectations of Religious Life / 647 guard, as first and primary witnesses of those energies and currents of sanctity which effectively renew the Church and the world? A lay per-son responds with fear and trembling: it does not seem to me to be so. Certainly there are not lacking admirable personal and communitarian tes-timonies in religious life--we have them present here--which have an impact far beyond the visible limits of the Church. Thanks be to God! But, in general, there are also the weighty results of the convulsive cri-sis which occurred during the first phase of the "post-conciliar times." The great yon Balthasar says that the strong crisis felt by the Church in the immediate post-conciliar time, and which was partially a crisis of secularization and partially a crisis of comprehension of authority in the Church, affected the priesthood and the religious state in the very depths of its theology and in a manner in-comparably stronger than for the laity who had no great reason to re-flect on its identity and to question itself. What a painful distance there was between the great conciliar hopes of an "adequate renewal of religious life" and the heavy price of un-certainty and instability, of disquiet and disoriented nervousness, of secu-larization and crisis which followed it: so heavy a price that some are still suffering from the results of it and many were ruined by it. A heavy price which indicates, on the one hand, how fossilized and anachronis-tic were some forms inherited from the past--already hatching a crisis under a rather sclerotic shell--and which signals, on the other hand, de-vious and unilateral interpretations and actions in the realization of the renewal desired by Council;, in which there tended to predominate worldly criteria rather than an authentic and rigorous discernment "of the spirit." And this is not the result of expert examinations. The ordinary laity witnessed this crisis when, for example, sending their children to Catho-lic schools, they realized that many religious were leaving their commu-nities, that there were very few novices, that those who remained were usually the oldest . But where do vocations come from? From the grace of God which is never lacking, and from the response of lay men and women who wish to live their baptism more radically. These have not been lacking in these twenty post-conciliar years either. So? We tend to take refuge in a detailed and often rather intellectual enumeration of all the obstacles which are found on the road of total commitment: secu-larism, consumerism, pansexualism, and so forth. Who can deny this? But the "worldly" difficultie~ ought to make even more evident the chal-lenging vigor in the sign, the witness, thecalling. Perhaps the most se- Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 rious,reply with regard to the "crisis" is that, in these last decades, re-ligious life has failed to be radical enough in its following of Christ, suf-ficiently rooted in the full certainties of life, passionate enough as an ex-pression of the mystery of communion, challenging enough for con-version, vigorous enough in its apostolate, transparent enough in its wit-ness to awaken amazement, fascination, admiration, imitation among the many laity made aware of the requirements of baptism and of their Chris-tian responsibility. Today the "uneasy time" has passed. Serenity has been regained. There are promising signs of an increase of vocations. From the at-tempted experimentations there have come more criteria to consolidate the positive and reject the negative. There is a different atmosphere. Re-ligious life is beginning to reflect the new ecclesiai climate. But the Church expects much more from it. It should be strengthened in the Lord. A crisis is fully overcome when the reasons which caused it are discerned in depth: crisis of spiritual discipline, crisis of authority, obe-dience, crisis of communion . It is necessary to "refound" relig-ious life, said Don Egidio Viganb a few years ago. And the great con-necting threads for this new phase of the carrying out of the Council, which gave direction to this refoundation, seem clear: radicality on the road of holiness, passion for the truth, solidity and fidelity to com-munion, missionary impetus of a new evangelization. New Forms of Consecrated Life If there has been a crisis of religious institutes--also states Balthasar--it cannot be said that there has been a crisis of consecrated life because, in addition to the traditional forms of religious life, there have been developing lately new forms of consecration, new forms of "monastic" experiences in the world. In the vigorous "ecclesial move-ments" at the present time--such as the Focolarini, Communion and Lib-eration, Charismatic Renewal in the Spirit--and also in very many other communitarian experiences on local levels, there have been maturing per-sons and groups of persons who have decided, privately, to assume as a radical commitment the practice of the evangelical counsels in life com-munities. These types of vocations have abounded and a great number of new vocations, especially to the contemplative religious life, come from these movements. To be sure, history teaches that different impulses of renewal of re-ligious life are generated from strong charismatic and communitarian ex-periments which do not fit easily into existing forms and which were gen-erating--- or were heading toward--new roads of sanctity. But those more Expectations of Religious Life / 649 and more numerous lay vocations to live the evangelical counsels in a radical form, in forms that are different from the traditional forms of "consecration," should constitute a questioning and challenging sign for religious institutes. Why do they not have a similar attraction? On the other hand, the institutes have a precious patrimony of traditions and of spiritual wisdom which, revitalized and clarified, could be of primary im-portance in facing and directing the new forms which are arising. In the Return of the Sacred Not a few attentive observers at the present time note the emerging signs of a complete process of cultural transition, as if we were in mo-ments of maximum realization and, at the same time, of exhaustion 'from the process of secularization stirred up by the secularist and materialis-tic ideologies: a nihilistic phase, the indifferent absence of great motives and ideals of life, spiritual emptiness and lethargy, the predominance of the miserable idols of money, pleasure, power. At the same time there are emerging everywhere, at times with surprising or ambiguous mani-festations, new sensitive, new "significant" dem~inds, new "religious" expectations. Do we, perhal~s, 'see this under such varied signs as the re-vitalization of the cultural-religious substratum of some nations-- Poland, the Philippines, Haiti;--the resistance to secularizing modern-ism: the renewal of Islam; the accelerated and dangerous expansion of sects and of "mysterious" and "esoteric" cults; the sensitive "relig-ious" antennae of the new generations of youth; the increase of priestly and religious vocations; the great number of places in which individuals and whole peoples claim at the present time to have enjoyed apparitions of the Virgin; the enormous popular repercussions of the apostolic trips of the Holy Father; the growing flood of pilgrims going to the sanctuar-ies of their country? And in so many other and varied ways . "In s.pite of secular-ism," says the final message of the extraordinary Synod, "there exist also signs of a return to the sacred . . , of a new hunger and thirst for the transcendent and the divine . We should open the way to the di-mension of the 'divine' or of the 'mystery.' " This resurgence of the sacred--states a synodal father--will be more vigorous yet in the perspective of the end of the second millennium, but care must be taken so that the response and satisfaction of this new sen-sitivity and need is not given through devious channels and forms, frus-trating in the end because it will appear that the Catholic Church does not itself refer sufficiently to the sacred. 650 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 The whole Church is challenged, but I ask if there is not a special warning call to religious life. Instead of pursuing a retarded and submis-sive adaptation to a secularist culture in process of disintegration, the signs of an emerging culture can be fed on and deciphered only by the signs of the Absolute of God, by the radical testimony of the Mystery of God in human life. In the Agitation of the Secular Life Now let us be more specific. Let us look more carefully at the con-crete and daily experience of lay people. It is their specific work to or-der the world according to the designs of God, to live their Christian vo-cation in the ordinary conditions of family, work, and social life, in the logic and even dullness of created things. This is the road-~diversified in an enormous multiplicity of ways---of their sanctification. Yes, in-deed! I believe that there are many silent, hidden, daily witnesses to sanc-tity among lay people. At times, however, it is truly wearying to have to endure a certain "idealism" or a great deal of ecclesiastical rhetoric when reference is made to the lay state, to the "adult lay person". One gets the im-pression that often it is an abstraction of the real rhythm and weight of the normal day of an ordinary lay person. It is necessary to sanctify and to sanctify oneself in the family, professional and social life. But, how avoid being "pulled about," absorbed by a permanent agitation of the rhythm of life in order to obtain those material and spiritual times nec-essary to give "breath," "feeling" and an orientation to one's own life? Generally, in order to find these moments, as, for example, to as-sist at Mass, to pray in the family, to speak of God with one's children, to grow spiritually as a couple, to be silent., it is necessary to strug-gle and even more, to acquire a "discipline" and to respect it and to put it into practice. Most often one is pulled along by the bustle of the activities, preoccupations, responsibilities and the immediate anxieties of daily life to such a point that life becomes opaque, gray, is impover-ished of spiritual content, goes on marginalizing "the religious" to de-termined ritual moments which become ever more infrequent. And yet more . The laity are asked to assume ecclesiai and secu-lar responsibilities which are on a large scale and require time and la-bor. They are asked to be "militant." And that i~ fine. But what does it mean concretely? That the hours dedicated as catechist in the parish or in teams of service, or to meetings of movements or apostolic groups to which they belong, or absorbed by union responsibilities or participa-tion in the political party--and in this type of commitment the demands Expectations of Religious Life / 651 always seem to multiply if one wishes things to go along better continu-ally-. those hours of "militancy" have to be taken or "stolen" from the domestic and family life at the end of a day's work. For this reason, lay militants are always unstable minorities, threat-ened with discontinuity, doubly sacrificed, in abnegation and dedication. This is not to be regretted; it is their normal habitual condition. Great institutions are not built nor great works done with "extra" hours. Two remarks seem important for service of religious life in face of these situations of the laity. The first is to realize the need that the lay people have--today more than ever---of time, signs and specific spaces of prayer, of being filled with the perspective of the kingdom, savoring the things of God, becoming impregnated with the spirit of the beatitudes which can provide specific nourishment for their family, professional or political life. Many lay people look at and are seeking the contemplative life of religious communities so as to enter into contact with their spiri-tual radiation. You know how difficult it is to be contemplatives in the secular life, since many of your communities are dedicated to works of the apostolate. You can imagine how much more difficult it is for the laity . The second remark refers to the availability of religious for the serv-ice of the Gospel when compared to the obligations of lay people. When I end my day's work, I return home, not in order to rest but to help my wife who is carrying out her duties for the children, to bathe the little ones, to attend to a thousand little domestic needs . I would like to read so many things that could help me grow--and my wife also, natu-rally- but I do not have the time. I would like to visit friends in diffi-culty, to participate in ecclesial or cultural meetings which seem impor-tant to me, to get to know important persons or experiences. But I can-not sacrifice more than a minimum of family time. It is in my marriage and in my family that I see my first and most important responsibilities as a Christian. I am a happy man, but at times I admire and envy the "full time" workers for the Gospel, the "professional revolutionaries" of the Church, those who consecrate themselves exclusively and totally to the Lord. They should show a liberty and availability of tremendous energies for the most varied services for the Christian people. Does it perhaps happen that where there is more time to dispose of, there is more time to waste? On Political Participation If the chief witness of the laity is the Christian presence in the con-duct of the economy of creation, this does not mean that this is a field 659 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 exclusively reserved to them. The witness of lay people challenges re-ligious to go beyond caricatures of flight from the world and to consider their own consecration to God a radical commitment in the service of hu-man beings and of society. The great contributions of the religious life in social construction and progress can be found throughout history; but it is a fact that since the Council they have been going beyond the nar-row horizons, the so-called exclusivity or spiritual incompetence in the name of which religious life degenerated into forms of insensitivity in the face of situations and conditions of injustice and oppressiori suffered by persons, social groups, entire peoples. If the struggle for justice is a constitutive dimension of evangeliza-tion; if the defense and promotion of the dignity, rights and liberties of all human beings are a necessary part of the mission of the Church; if the kingdom of God--kingdom of peace and of justice, of truth and of love--is growing mysteriously in human, history--no religious can con-sider extraneous to her own peculiar vocation these commitments and tasks. It also falls to the religious "to evangelize the political' '--as says the Puebla document--in the sense of values of the Gospel and in con-formity with them. Up to this point, everything is clear. But there are cases in which, in the face of flagrant situations of injustice, misery and violence, when a vigorous and incisive commitment on the part of lay people is lacking, religious feel called to a more direct, surer, more incisive social and po-litical action. No one can be "neutral" in face of such situations. Even in these cases, however, it is necessary, on the one hand, to control the "immediate reaction" which ends up by absorbing and weakening the original vocation of the religious, and on th~ other, to prevent their ac-tions ending up in a well-determined political praxis, in a militant, dis-ciplined commitment, organized in a political party or strategy, with a basic reference to power. In taking this road, the premises for "secularization" are created. In addition, there is the "clerical" temptation of using prestige, social weight and the cultural representativity of ecclesiastics--above all, in Christian environments--as a basis to affirm definite political options worthwhile and free in themselves, and left then to the prudence of each Christian. In cases in which this "political praxis" of religious exists, many of the laity are conscious of a great lack of preparation of an "idealis-tic" voluntarism which substitute forms of "moral indignation" for the complex calculation of political .analysis. Expectations of Religious Life The categorical imperative "it is necessary to become committed" is identified, by some religious, in a mech'anical or simplistic manner with a "plunging into" the agitation of political matters without discern-ment. And this "plunging," with their lack of technical and political preparation, with their "ecclesiastical" condition of life far from the re-alistic stability of family and professional life and responsibility, with their lack of respect for the "weightiness" of the daily life of ordinary mortals, and with their counting on the particular protection of the Church--all this ends up by creating a particular type of untrustworthy political person and confused religious. The ease and simplicity with which some religious pass from traditional forms of life to political radi-calizations and moralistic ideologies is incredible. They are easily ma-nipulated and absorbed into a horizon which gradually becomes a prior-ity and then into a respect which becomes a substitute for ecclesial communion. Truly the Pope is right in insisting that it is not the proper role for religious to be converted into political or union leaders, and even less into state functionaries! Various Methods of Service to Humanity In these experiences of specific political participation, there is, on the part of religious, even if not consciously, a certain devaluation of their particular vocation and, consequently, an inferiority complex which makes one want to excel in the typically lay manner of service to human-ity. This service seems identified with social and political militancy if it is to be truly efficacious. Anything else seems like alienation, indif-ference and even the complicity of religious with injustice and oppres-sion. With this attitude as a basis, there comes a loss of confidence in the specificity of the religious consecration as a fundamental manner of serv-ice to humanity. The council was already warning about this when it said: Let no one think that, by their consecration, religious have become strang-ers to their feliowmen or useless citizens of this earthly city. But, even though in some instances they do not directly mingle with their contem-poraries, yet in a more profound sense, these religious are united with them in the heart of Christ and cooperate with them spiritually. In this way the work of building up the earthly city can always have its foun-dation in the Lord and can tend toward him. Otherwise, those who build this city will perhaps have labored in vain (LG n. 46). Does not the witness of St. Th6r~se of Lisieux teach us the incom- 654 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 parable value of prayer for all human service? Those who take on as a priority the construction of the world through matrimony, the administra-tion of goods and power--such are the laity--greatly need those who ac-company them with prayer as a priority, who remind them that we are in the world but not of the world and that we cannot conform ourselves to the present time; that we must safeguard and strengthen our Christian liberty in face of the seductions of the idols of money, power and pleas-ure; that the "logic" of the beatitudes is authentically revolutionary; that Christ is the cornerstone of all social construction which is to be truly human; that it is worth the trouble to struggle and sacrifice in order to continue creating conditions and experiences of greater justice, solidar-ity and peace so that nothing will be forgotten and all will be redeemed when God grants us "new heavens and a new earth". The best and most radical service to humanity is the testimony of a life which manifests the total supremacy of the love of God. For this rea-son, the special road of service to humanity for religious life consists, today more than ever, in being centered in one's "consecration," in a special care and cultivation of its religious dimension, of its discipline of life and spiritual growth. Living and Manifesting a Specific Charism This life according to the Spirit is diversified and deepened in the fol-lowing of the "charism of the founders." The apostolic exhortation Evangelica Testificatio and the decree Mutuae Relationes emphasized this in a special way. For the majority of lay people, however, I believe that this statement would not be well understood because there is the dan-ger of considering religious life generically, with little variations, with more or less uniform ways, barely differentiated into families with dif-ferent names and habits. It is necessary to ask if the various religious com-munities witness effectively to the gift they have received, to their own original spiritual richness, their particular contribution to the Christian enrichment of all the people of God. If fidelity to one's own charism is a form of obedience to the grace of Christ, if it characterizes the origi-nality of an evangelical project for the following of Christ and encour-ages the discovery of new lights and new dimensions of the totality of Christian life, if it is a specific way of sanctification, the greatest contri-bution of a religious community to the life of the Church and of each Christian is to keep'very much alive the fidelity to this charism, to live it with the same radicality as the founder lived it, to regenerate and radi-ate its relevancy before the needs of the Church and the people, I believe that thus the whole of the people of God would feel more "encouraged" Expectations of Religious Life / 655 and "worked upon" by the powerful ferment of renewal of Christian life. The laity who have contact with religious communities, directly or through schools, clinics, and so forth, would be much more "struck" by these radical charisms. All of that is contained in the generic term-- the Sisters. In this sense, we find much to the point the words of John Paul II in Brazil when, after having emphasized the great pastoral and apostolic service accomplished by religious, he stated: It is not because it is useful to the pastoral work that religious life occu-pies a very definite place in the Church and has an indispensable value. The contrary is true: religious life lends an efficacious service to the pas-toral work because it is and keeps itself firmly faithful to the position it occupies in the Church and to the charisms which characterize this po-sition. In addition, I ask myself if religious communities should not put more emphasis on the witness of the sanctity of their founders or spiri-tual teachers. Many times witness is of more value than words and Chris-tians need "models," fathers and teachers on the road of faith. Life Communities in the Church Permanent life communities which fully involve the person are found in the life of the Church only in religious communities and in Christian families. The differences between these two are obvious. The famil~ is a "natural" community, whose matrimonial nucleusbin the loving and fruitful union of the man and woman--is "sacramentalized" by the Church. The religious community does not have a "natural" base and those who participate in it freely sacrifice precious goods--such as the whole field of conjugal love, the free disposal of material goods, indi-vidual autonomy for the great decisions of life--for a Good, for a Love which is much greater. ~But in both cases we see, in different forms, the mystery of commun-ion which there is in the human origin and destiny and which becomes a daily miracle. In societies which are ever more disunited and frag-mented, where the powerful and uniforming tides of massification break up social bonds in the social fabric--much has been written about th'is-- these very forms of community life acquire even more importance and a great "impact." There is an intense desire for personal recognition, friendship, solidarity, authentic reconciliation, deeper and fuller human encounters and relationships so that people are very sensitive to the hu-man witness and acceptance of these life communities. 656 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 There are beautiful analogies which could be made between religious communities and. family communities. Do not the various aspects of hu-man love which are found ,in family life and which reflect the insepara-ble dimensions of divine love exist in their own manner and even more fully in the religious community as signs, glimpses, first-fruits of the king-dom? Both communities are based on the indestructible and fruitful foun-dation of a spousal love. While in the person-to-person encounter of the man and his wife, their passionate experience of love truly reflects the covenant of Christ with his Church, the religious lets herself be grasped directly and tota~lly by the limitless love of Christ, in the immediilcy of the covenant between Spouse and spouse, with the totality and sublima-tion of a commitment to which all human love is called. Cohsecrated vir-ginity- lived in its serene and mysterious fullness~is the sign of p~ssi-bility and of example to order and encourage the "chastity" of married life in this vital, delicate and fragile complex between the spi,ritual sway and instinctive impulses. There is a complete education to lib~rty, to do-minion over selfl which 'is a ~:ondition of authentic love--so important and urgent today on the level of tlae' new generations, determined and marked by a hedonist mentality and an atmosphere of flagrant eroticism-- which shines through a healthy religious life. ~ ~ The family, although implicitly, also requires a "rule" for i!s com-munity life, and authority is the prinqiple and guarantee of communion. In the rule of rules--that of St. Benedict--the "superior".of the com-mu~ nity is called "father"--abbot. It is good that the superior is recog-nized as "mother" and all are "sisters." Without paternity (maternity) we would remain orphans, community would disintegrate because it would be without a source and point of reference. This is the value of "authority" as derived from "augere," that which helps to increase, to grow in life, which permits the human to grow in persons. It i~ always a reflection on the paternity (maternity) of God, who giyes us life, makes. it grow in faith, brings it to plentitude. There is a spiritual fruitfulness which~.engenders abundant fruits of Christian life. Lay people often observe with special attention the life of r~eligious communities so as to see if they discover, if they perceive that "some-thin~ more" which they expect. For this reason, excessive formalism, minor quarrels, divisions, absence of human warmth, and more dull the communitarian witness. It is as if community were more an obligatory formality than a radiation of liberty and life. The laity must be able to see in the life of religious communities the carrying out in a small way of this reconciliation in depth, of this fraternity and solidarity,, of this Expectations of Religious Life / 657 peace and happiness in communion for which all human beings yearn in their heart, a strong sign of "reconciled humanity" in the interior of the mystery of communion of the Church, a model of "the new society" in which can be found united liberty and solidarity, where authority is exercised as paternity (maternity), where there is a different attitude to-wards riches, in which human relations are brought to their fullness by liberty and do not degenerate into domination, and which brings all its members to an ordered participation;'and "above all," as says a beauti-ful text bf the Puebia document: where it is unequivocally manifested that, without a radical communion with, God in Jesus Christ, any form of purely human communion re-mains in the long run incapable of being sustained and ends totally in tu'rning against the human person. In other words, nothing less than a corner of heaven! Some Priority Areas Lay people are very sensitive to the way religious life witnesses to poverty, and they are also very demanding, at times too demanding, with religious and little, indeed, with themselves. It is good, howev.er, to be challenged by this exigency. More than an "area" of work or of commitment, poverty is a radi-cal dimension of "cbnsecration" insofar as it is detachment from mate-rial goods and affirmation of the liberty which recognizes God as its only good. These are admirable witnesses. On too many occasions, however, the laity do not succeed in seeing how this vow of poverty is manifested concretely as detachment and liberty. Even more, many times, with no malice, they notice that religious liv~e rather conveniently~---even comfort- ~ably--x~ith all material problems settled in the present and in the future, and that in environments which show nothing of "poverty." It'is not a question of their asking for "romantic" gestures nor of exaggerat)ng criticism. But, at least a greater austerity and severity of life is required, a more generous availability in the sharing of material and spiritual goods, the elimination of all that is superfluous . This exigency is even more challenging since it is within a Church which is ever more conscious of and determined concerning the so-called "preferential option for the poor." "This preferential option for the poor," says Don Egidio Viganb in a very expressive synthesis which we cannot examine in detail now, questions religious very concretely, especially the institutes of active life. It demands a review of the specific mission in light of those receiv- Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 ing it. It requires a study and replanning of the presence of the religious. It deepens the sacramental meaning of the vow of poverty, places in dia-logue the great values of evangelical poverty with the pressing obliga-tions of social misery, proclaims with ever greater clarity that the pov-erty of the beatitudes is a challenge to materialism and opens doors to solutions which are alternatives to those of the consumer society. Religious should also take to heart the criteria mentioned by the magis-terium of the Church as to the evangelical authenticity of this "option": it is not exclusive nor excluding because the message of salvation is di-rected to all; it is animated by an intention which is primarily religious and not political; it does not let itself be entrapped by nor reduced to a class dialectic; it takes into consideration the existence of various forms of poverty in situations of 'hunger and misery, of unemployment and marginalization, of deprivation of liberty, of physical or mental health or other material and/or moral privations. In this preferential love for the poor as derived from the love of Christ for all is found in great measure the witness of religious life today. A special attention to the young also seems to be a basic and urgent requirement for religious communities of our times. There is a long and impressive religious tradition of the education of youth which shou!d not be abandoned but should be renewed and deepened. The point is clear; an individual becomes social and is educated, from the most tender age, fundamentally through the family and the school. These are the two ba-sic "channels" to lead youth to reality. But could it be that the States, political parties, ideological strategists would take a strong interest in the school in order to "penetrate" into the world of youth and direct it ac-cording to their various criteria and interests, while the Church-- especially religious communities--would underestimate its educational tradition and its educational institutions and responsibilities? In times of crisis of credibility and of search for "ideologies," when the most no-ble energies and concerns remain dissatisfied with the suffocating mate-rialism of the consumer society, it is more important than ever to offer to the young great and vigorous proposals, ideal certainties of life as signs and guides for their own education. Christian lay people, parents of families, need to count on the help of the Catholic school because the first responsibility for education falls on the parents, and the family is the basic place for growth in the faith of its members. Nevertheless, there is a considerable amount of catecheti-cal instruction, of Christian attitudes, of fruitful joining of faith with cul-ture which is acquired in. the environment and activity of the school. The Expectations of Religious Life I 659 most fruitful means is that of an active and co-responsible educational collaboration between the family and the Catholic school. I am sure that it is not without concern to the laity that educational religious communi-ties are abandoning the field of the school. On the contrary, they should intensify their commitment involving the collaboration of the laity, es-pecially of the parents, and should go beyond the "administrative" and routine activities in the running of the school, transforming it ever more into a vigorous, radiant, highly educational environment and seek means to make their services always more accessible and fruitful. Here there is much to rethink, to plan and to carry out along the line of a scholastic pastoral which meets all these demands. I think also of other milieux and human activities which have been converted into new frontiers of the ecclesial mission, in which the pres-ence of the Church cannot be limited to some free-lance laity. There surely is no lack of religious charisms for the apostolic work among in-tellectuals, artists, professionals of social communication, factory work-ers . According to the Measure of the Gift of Christ One last remark. The Council says that while profession of the evangelical counsels involves the renunciation of goods which undoubtedly deserve to be highly valued, it does not con-stitute an obstacle to the true development of the human person, but by its nature is supremely beneficial to that development (LG 46). Thus the renunciation should not diminish the human but rather help to develop the human stature according to the measure of the gift of Christ. This "something more," this "much more," of holiness, which the laity expect of religious finds its response in the witness of new men, of new women, penetrated with the Absolute of God, radically incorpo-rated into Christ, totally dedicated to the service of others. If Christ re-veals to human persons the 'fullness of their being and their destiny, all radical following of Christ can be only a path of integral fulfillment for humanity. It is necessary to show that what one abandons in order to fol-low Christ will be recovered even now, multiplied, as more human riches more full of humanity. Lay people hope to meet in religious well-balanced Christian person-alities because they are centered in God and, therefore, persons having an effective equilibrium and emotional serenity (how many "argu-ments" reveal psychological immaturity !) of ever more solid intellectual formation (why in the past did one so rarely meet religious on this 660 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 level?), with 'a great liberty because a great obedience radiates a richness of life from their "interior castle." They expect them to be attentive and generous in dedication and service, spreading a happiness and a joy which come from within, persons of whom one can speak and think of as models for women of hidden but full life, in the image of Mary, first and greatest disciple of Christ. Words, Words, Words How glibly do we toss them off, precious self-wrought jewels, precious beyond diamond, sapphire or pearl: Mined from quickened breath, warmed by channeled blood, carried live on currents of air they glow to foul or fair. Let us then nourish them ~with care, knowing their fire can rage uncontrolled to devastating No or curved to simple Yes, can make a world of bleak distress spin in giddy joy, and bring a God to birth while angels sing! Marcella M. Holloway, C.S.J. 6321 Clemens Avenue, Saint Louis, Missouri 63130 The Public and Witness Religious Life Dimension of David F. O'Connor, S.T. Father O'_Connor, past president of the Canon Law Society of America, is chairman of the Department of Church Law at the Washington Theological Union. He resides at the Holy Trinity Mission Seminary; 9001 New Hampshire Avenue; Silver Spring, Maryland 20903. Religious life has a public dimension to it which is intended by the Church. Religious, both in their personal and their corporate lifestyles, are meant to be identifiable as Church-people and to witness Gospel val-ues. They engage in' forms of the apostolate and in ministry always in the name of the Church and under the authority of their respective relig-ious SUl~eriors and local bishops. All of this manifests their distinctive character, their place in the Church and their canonical status. An awareness of this--and it is not always viewed by everyone as an unambigtious biessing~--helps us better understand some of the events occurring on the contemporary scene; for example, the reaction of the hierarchy to religious who are seeking public office or those who sign published statements which a.ppear to be contrary to Church positions. The following article is iritended to elaborate somewhat on this pub-lic dimension of the religious life and some of its implications for relig-ious. The Institutionalizing of a Charismatic Fbrm Since Vatican II, we have a renewed awareness of the religious life as a charismatic vocation, a gift of the Spirit to the Church.2 This has helped deepen our understanding and appreciation of its place and role in the Church. For the Holy Spirit is not only the source of the inspira- 661 662 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 tion of the founders, but also of those who have followed after them down through the succeeding generations. These charisms have contrib-uted in a significant and special way to the very holiness of the Church and to its ability to fulfill its mission in this world.3 A religious commu-nity is obliged to hand on an awareness of its charism to new members so that these gifts of the Spirit may be lived, safeguarded, deepened and constantly developed.4 Charisms are given within the Church for the building up of the Church community. Whenever a claim is made by a group of the faith-ful that it is living a radical form of the Gospel life, such a claim cannot be ignored by the wider Church, especially by the bishops who are the pastors and guardians of the faith.5 The assertion that one is being led by the Spirit, now as in the past, needs to be examined and authenticated by the wider Church community before it can be given credence and ac-ceptance. Historically, ecclesial recognition was given informally and im-plicitly for the first few centuries. But, beginning in the fourth century, bishops of the local churches, aware of certain abuses and of the disrup-tiveness of some wandering monks, required monastic groups to have of-ficial and explicit approval before establishing a foundation. Indeed, the canons of the Council of Chalcedon (45 I) established the norms Which regulated the relationship of bishops and monasteries up until the Mid-dle Ages. Then, because of the development of large and centralized re-ligious orders in the thirteenth century, official recognition was fre-quently reserved to Rome. It is a fact, then, that ecclesial recognition and authentication of charis-matic groups existed in some form from the beginning of the devel-opment of religious life. It was necessary in order to determine whether or not a particular group or rule truly was presenting a viable form of Gospel life. Ecclesial or canonical approbation had the added benefit of helping to preserve the original charism of the founder and the first mem-bers by institutionalizing it within the visible community of faith. Ca-nonical authentication of a particular style of Gospel life has helped it to be passed on to succeeding generations of men and women, and this has redounded to the benefit of the wider Church. The religious life, as we know it today, is canonically established only through the official recognition of the Church's pastors, the hierar-chy. This has helped safeguard the faithful from. being led astray by ab-errant forms of Christianity which, in the past, frequently ended up in fanaticism, schism or heresy. The Church possesses within itself the charism of discerning spirits, and this is exercised by the bishops as part Witness of Religious Life / 663 of their pastoral office. As Karl Rahner has stated: " . . . the official Church is also the guardian and guide of the charismatic element--she herself possesses the gift of the discernment of spirits."6 Canonical Approval of a Religious Institute The Church, through the pastoral office of its bishops, is forced at various times and places to state what it considers to be compatible or incompatible with the Gospel because the Church does sponsor groups, institutions and agencies which publicly and officially represent it. These public institutions have to be supervised lest they present a distorted pic-ture of the gospel values which the Church incarnates. Religious insti-tutes are one such form. Both the institutes as such and its members rep-resent the Church. Once canonical or ecclesiastical recognition is granted to a religious community, that community no longer exists as a private and independ-ent group of the faithful, nor does the institute exist in isolation from par-ties external to it, even though it does enjoy some canonical autonomy.7 For, once having sought and been granted official recognition and ap-proval, the religious institute takes upon itself an added identity--it be-comes an ecclesial institute and is linked to the hierarchy in a special man-ner. 8 Official Church recognition identifies the institute as a Church in-stitution, and it identifies its members, women or men religious, as Church-people, involved in a life of public dedication and service in the name of the Catholic Church.9 Membership in a canonically approved form of consecrated life, which requires the profession of public vows, involves an ecclesial form of commitment that distinguishes religious from other members of the faithful, even those who may be in secular institutes. The latter do not represent the Church in its public life, but live somewhat anonymously, maintain their secular vocation, and qui-etly work to Christianize their milieu. ~0 A Personal Witness That Is Public Religious, as publicly consecrated members of the faithful, are ex-pected, as is every Christian, to witness a personal commitment to Christ. But because they are called by their vocation to an ecclesiai form of public consecration, they are expected tO bear a visible witness to a deep, personal experience of Christ and to share the faith, hope and love which it inspires. ~ For religious, above all, are consecrated to the Lord. Their development in holiness of life is more important than the good works they perform. As John Paul II has remarked: "What counts most 664/Review for Religious~ September-October, 1987 is not what religious do, but what they are as persons consecrated to the Lord." ~2 The canons of the Code of Canon Law reassert some of these essen-tial personal obligations. Canon 662 states that religious are to have as their highest rule of life the ['ollowing of Christ as it is proposed in the Gospel and in their constitutions. The constitutions of each institute help specify and make the Gospel particular for their religious, how it is to be lived in service to others in the name of Christ and of his Church. Re, ligious are to bemen and women of prayer. Their first and foremost duty is the contemplation of divine things, and assiduous union with God in prayer. ~3 They are expected to use the traditional forms ,of, worship and devotion: daily participation in the eucharistic sacrifice, the prayerful read-ing of Sacred Scripture, mental prayer, devotion to Our Lady, and the Liturgy of the Hours. ~'~ .Religious, as individuals,.are ,to engage, in the asceticism required for personal conversion of heart through a daily ex-amination o~ conscience and by frequently receiving the sacrament of pen-ance. 15 These devotional obligations are assumed personally by every relig-ious who takes his or her spiritual life seriously. The cultivation of the interior life is an absolute necessity if the public consecration of a relig-ious is not to become a charade. Without a deep, personal spiritual life, perseverance in a public form of consecrated life becomes tenuous and the fulfillment of the vows turns int~) a heavy burden. " Th~ faithful have a right to expect that those who have publicly ded-icated their lives to Christ by religious profession will be living exam-ples of a GoSpel life. The Church presents religious to the world as pub-lic witnesses of evangelibal values. Holiness of life and a generous, un-selfish service of the People of God are a'rightful expect, ation from each religious. A Corporate Witness That Is Public Religious life is characterized by a communitarian lifestyle. All reli-gious are expected to live in some form of common life which is proper to the specific institute to which they belong. 16 Because of the centrality of the enclosure for monastic religious and some form of active service for apostolic religious, the styles of their common life will be radically different. Indeed, monastic institutes which are totally ordered to the con-templative life are prohibited from engaging in any form of pastoral min-istry outside the monastery,. ~7 However, all religious are expected to live in a house of their own institute with their.brothers or sisters. ~8 Their life together is intended to be a microcosm of the Church, idealized in the Witness of Religious Life / 665 Jerusalem community described in the Acts of the Apostles (2:44): "The faithful all lived together and owned everything in common; they sold their goods and possessions and shared among themselves according to what each one needed." Religious community life is to be filled with pray-erfuines~ and with Christian service and love. Religious life is actually lived on the local level, in a pa.rticular house with specific women or men. The locai community takes on certain char-acteristics, principally because of the individual religious who live to-gether, and secondarily because of the apostolates in which they are en-gaged. The image or witness which they project will depend upon many factors, especially the expectations and experience of the people with whom the religious interact. If the religious are perceived as prayerful, charitable, joyful and generous in their community life together, their cor-porate or collective witness will evidence the Gospel ideal and they will be what the Church intends--living witnesses of Christian love. It may be well to recall the fact that a group is frequently able to wit-ness better than individual persons. An individual can be--all too easily-- simply dismissed as just an eccentric. However, a community of Chris-tian men or women, living a similarly dedicated lifestyle, cannot be so perfunctorily ignored or written-off. Moreover, the members of a relig-ious community can offer support to one another by their companionship and prayerfulness, especially when the Gospel values they embody are countercultural. Living witnesses are a powerful sign. Reflective people will be forced to examine the faith dimension and Gospel values which are the foundation of their own religious lifestyle. Those who do not share our Christian values may be led to a greater appreciation of them by the wit-ness of a vibrant, faith-filled religious community. In fact, it was just such an experience which led the famous~ agnostic, British commenta-tor, Malcolm Muggeridge, to become a Christian-- and later a Catholic-- after his experience in Calcutta with Mother Teresa and her Missionar-ies of Charity. Few people can remain totally indifferent to a corporate Christian wit-ness. Either they will reject it or accept it. That is why the Church pre-sents religious as living witnesses of Christ, as Lumen Gentium, 46, states: Let religious see well to it that the Church truly show forth Christ through them with ever increasing clarity to believers and unbelievers alike --- Christ in contemplation on the mountain, or proclaiming the king-dom of God to the multitudes, or healing the sick and maimed and con- 666 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 verting sinners to a good life, or blessing children and doing good to all people, always in obedience to the will of the Father who sent him. The Witness of Public Vows Religious profess the evangelical counsels as public vows in the con-text of their community lifestyle. Their vows cannot be properly under-stood or appreciated apart from the context of their common life. The Witness of Consecrated Poverty The public vow of poverty, as professed in religious institutes, would be better appreciated and offer a better public witness if it were presented as a vow of common life and goods. Too often the term "poverty" is judged by socio-economic criteria and religious are misjudged as lack-ing because they are not "poor" in that ordinary meaning of the term. Those of us who are educated or who live in comfortable houses, drive automobiles, eat three meals a day, and so forth, (and that is the vast majority of American religious) are sometimes even thought to be vio-lating our commitment. We are judged as hypocritical for professing a "vow of poverty," when it is obvious that we are not "poor." There certainly is a socio-economic dimension to how we are to live our religious life. Our lifestyle must be adapted to the particular cultural and economic situation in which we live, so that we do not give the appearance of being wealthy. Also, there are ascetical demands made upon us, personally and corporately, to live simply and avoid the dele-terious influences of the larger consumer society. Nevertheless, we are not, in fact, invited by our vow to embrace a debilitating, crushing, in-humane form of economic poverty as the ideal of our commitment. That is not religious poverty. That is not the purpose of our vow. Religious poverty can only be valued and offer edification if it is recognized as an essential aspect of community life and, where applica-ble, a dimension of an apostolate. Thus everything a religious acquires as a member of the institute is acquired for the institute. 19 The religious community, in turn, provides for the needs of its members so that they can fulfill the purpose of their vocation in that specific religious family.2° Ascetically, religious are urged to forego standards of comfort and conven-ience which may be legitimate for others and to exercise a certain re-straint in the forms of relaxation and entertainment they choose.2~ All of this is intended to promote the spiritual life of the religious and to help free us from the desire to accumulate things and, positively, to liberate our hearts for the things of God. Witness of Religious Life / 667 When religious undertake apostolates among the socio-economically and culturally deprived, they are required to adapt their style of living to the demands of their apostolate. This will often involve a style of life approximating that of the people among whom they live and work. Life on the missions is not like life at home. Life among the poor in the rural areas of Appalachia or in the inner-city of our large urban centers will bring with it many restrictions and the call for a special asceticism. Those religious can well be viewed as living "poorly" in the more ordinary sense of the word. Generally, if religious are seen as lix;ing a rather simple lifestyle, per-sonally and communally, this will be a source of great edification, espe-cially if they are serving others generously and unselfishly. The Gospel ideal of poverty and simplicity can be beautifully manifested by such a public witness. The faithful are reminded that superfluous goods are not necessary for happiness and contentment. The unencumbered life of reli-gious can help people to look beyond the present world. It can support the credibility of the Gospel° message which religious are to preach by their lifestyle. Religious poverty can be a reminder to every member of the faithful that we are all called to rely upon the Lord, and to manifest a loving concern for our neighbor, especially the needy and the .deprived, whoever they may be. The Witness of Consecrated Chastity If there is anything that is truly countercultural in our modern soci-ety, it is the value of Christian chastity and marital fidelity. A life of dedi-cated chastity and celibacy runs directly contrary to the pleasure princi-ple which is so dominant in our post-Christian western world. Our contem-poraries cannot ignore the witness of thousands of men and women who profess to live chastely and celibately out of love for God and in the serv-ice of others. Those who share our common faith and values, especially those who are themselves without spouses because of circumstances be-yond their control, find great support and consolation in the awareness that many of their sisters and brothers in the Lord live happy and fulfill-ing lives as celibate religious. The community lifestyle of religious provides them with their princi-ple support group.22 Their life shared in common with their religious brothers or sisters is a Christian and humane lifestyle that offers an ideal context for their vowed life. Apostolic religious especially benefit from a communal dimension to their dedication to mission. While their pri-mary orientation may be to serving others, their religious community set-ting on the local level should be the base to which they return for spiri- 668 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 tual ,and fraternal/sisterly refreshment. Again, the fact that a group can offer a better witness than individuals is an important consideration when it involves a chaste and celibate Christian lifestyle. Individuals find their commitment under assault or too heavy a burden if they live alone and apart. Living celibately in a communal setting can witness that religious do not live lonely and eccentric single lives, but live in a Christian faith community and in hope of complete fulfillment in the eschaton. The Witness of Consecrated Obedience Religious have willingly accepte~d,a pattern of life that is largely laid down for them.23 They follow a,rule or constitution and live in residence under the authority of those who have been elected or appointed as reli-gious superiors.24 Their vow of obedience has limited their freedom and their options so that they might pursue the cor~mon good and the corpo-rate mission of their particular religious institute. Ultimately, they seek, as women and men of faith, to discern the will of God in the commands they are given in holy obedience. This enalSles their institute to under-take corporate commitments and helps galvanize the personal investmeni of time and talent into a commhnity endeavor. ' The life of religious obedience requires a great sense of faith. The generosity that this clemands can help foster the spiritual maturity of re-ligious as they strive humbly to imitate the obedience and love of Jesus who sought only.to do the will of his Father. Certainly, jn a society and culture that exaggerates the importance of individual freedom, Christian obedience is truly countercultural. The obedience of religious is fre-quently denigrated as a "blind obedience" by those who do not share our faith values. However, our brothers and sisters in the faith often find it a rather Christ-like response and are disedified when they perceive the opposite in the lives of religious. All Christians are obliged to seek the will of the Lord. Thus the hum-ble example of obedient religious can only help to build up the Body of Christ. Canonical Consequences of the Public Dimension Appropriate Attire Since religious life has a public dimension to it, it seems reasonable, all things considered, that a distinctive style of garb might have some advantages, especially in many apostolates, and in our commitment to a simple lifestyle. It is quite common to find that people in "service" roles, even professional ones, are recognizable .by their uniform or pro- Witness of Religious Life / 669 fessional'attire. We tend to expect that these people will be readily iden-tifiable when we need their services. 'Indeed, the sign or witness dimension is referred to in the canon which concerns the garb of religious.25 While a religious "habit," in the strict sense of the term, is more appropriately a monastic garment, custom and tradition among many apostolic institutes has provided them with a style of dress which identified them as pertaining to a particular religious family. Often enough it was a form of dress suitable to another age or culture. Frequently, too, apostolic groups adopted the contempo-rary clerical dress, if they were men religious. While not adopting a habit, as such, they did choose a style of dress that gradually became a traditional garb that went unchanged and unadapted to times and circum-stances. It was for the most part a post-Vatican II phenomenon that, in-stead of guitably adapting the dress, as was expected, it was often dis-carded entirely in part because of the difficulty of deciding on something acceptable to all the members. Another purpose for wearing a religious garb is that it is intended to be a sign of simplicity of lifestyle and religious poverty. It is appropri-ate that a public witness to the Gospel should evidence a certain degree of Christian detachment and modesty. Experience has shown that it is difficult to,dress attractively and appropriately for every occasion with-out having to invest in a.rather extensive wardrobe. A simple garb which is modest, becoming and dignified solves this problem. However, the rules and regulations of each institute, the expectations of the local Church, the demands of the apostolate and the requirements of the particular culture and clime all have to be considered when it comes to deciding in concrete situations how one ought to be dressed. There is no requirement in Canon Law that the habit or religious garb be worn on every occasion, nor at all times, nor in all places. Indeed, the Apostolic~ See itself has stated that a secular style of dress, without any recognizable sign or symbol, can be permitted when a habit would be an impediment to the everyday exercise of activities which should be undertaken by the relig'ious.26 Mission in the Name,.of the Church All forms of apostolic activity are to be undertaken by men and women religious only in the name of the Church and in communion with it.27 The exercise of the apostolate by religious is never entirely a pri-vate and personal ministry. It is always, in some sense, a public and cor-porate one.28 The Vatican Council stated that one of the essential ele-ments of the Christian apostolate is that it be conducted in union with 670 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 those whom the Holy Spirit has assigned pastorally to govern the Church.29 It is the duty of the local bishop to coordinate all forms of the apostolate among his portion of the People of God.3° Religious are' al-ways to be subject to their own superiors and to the local bishop in the exercise of all forms of the external apostolate.3~ Unbecoming Activities Church law has always recognized that the public nature of the cleri-cal ministry and the religious life places certain restrictions on the ac-tivities in which clerics or religious may engage. However, what may be inappropriate at one time and place may not be so in another. Times change and so do the circumstances. As a result, the 1983 Code of Canon Law is both different and simi-lar to the 1917 Code. It is different insofar as some of the activi, ties which were considered unbecoming for clerics and religious, such as the prac-tice of medicine, especially surgery, are no longer prohibited by the re-vised code. It is the same in that a number of activities which were proscribed by the old code appear again in the new one-~especially the general prohibition that forbids religious and clerics to engage in any ac-tivity which is foreign to their way of life.32 No specific unbecoming are enumerated here. Such determination is be left to the good judgment and prudence of mature women and men religious as they con-sider the demands of the apostolate in their .particular culture, time and place. Of course, specific directives can be given by the proper religious superiors and by the local bishops. These would have to be observed. Public or Political Office The new code continues the prohibition of the old one that religious are not to assume a public office to which is attached the exercise of civil authority, such as the office of mayor, attorney general, governor, or sim-ilar offices.33 The reason seems self-evident--persons holding such of-rices confuse Church ministry with a civil role, and inhibit a Gospel and prophetic stance. Religious are meant to be°at the service of people as heralds of the Gospel in the name of the Church. Similarly, they are not to take an active role in partisan political par-ties nor in the management of labor unions, unless they have the permis-sion of their ecclesiastical superiors.34 Again, the reason for this general proscription is that the public image and identity of a religious is that of a representative of the Church community. When publicly dedicated Church-people become too closely identified with a specific ideology, any Gospel witness is blunted, and the situation often distracts people Witness of Religious Life / 671 from the various social justice and public stands which the Church may want to make through its pastors.35 Finally, religious are supposed to be agents of reconciliation, not division. They should foster peace and jus-tice as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.36 Secular Financial Responsibilities , Another general area which religious are wisely urged to avoid, un-less good reasons indicate otherwise--in which cases permission can be granted--is the acceptance of secular financial responsibilities or involve-ment in business and trade activities. The canons prohibit religious, gen-erally, from undertaking the management of property owned by the la-ity and from assuming any secular office which require financial accountability.37 However, today it is easy to envision situations in which a religious might be expected to do so. For example, the demands of a certain apostolate may require that, at least for the time being, a re-ligious administer the finances of an organization, especially when no one else is in a position to do so. Likewise, a religious may find himself or herself having to take care of the financial affairs of an incapacitated relative or friend. Charity and common sense may simply demand this. However, the general prohibition is a wise one and should force a relig-ious to consider alternatives. And having to explain a request to do so to the religious superior can help prevent an imprudent decision. The same type of consideration should be given to the matter of a religious becoming involved in business or trade, personally or on be-half of others.38 The present code is more lenient than the 1917 one and expressly indicates that permission to do so can be granted, presumably for good reasons. Again, it is not difficult to imagine situations where this may be necessary or beneficial, at least for a reasonable period of time. If, for example, a religious is an only child and inherits a small family business with which he or she had been most familiar before en-tering religion, the most prudent decision could be for the religious tem-porarily to oversee the business until other provisions can be made. The above prohibitions are, in general, completely consonant with the nature of the religious life. Yet it is eminently reasonable that excep-tions be permitted. The dangers present for religious, in becoming too hastily and imprudently involved in financial matters that have nothing to do with their community, are all too evident. It is especially fitting that religious not be burdened with financial involvements when they have responded to a vocation which requires them to develop an asceti- 679 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 cism of detachment and a life of simplicity. Military Service and Civil Exemptions Finally, since religious are followers of the Prince of Peace, it is par-ticularly incongruous that they volunteer to bear arms in times of con-flict, unless they are legally bound to do so. Therefore, the canons state that religious are not to volunteer for military service and they should take advantage of civil exemptions, if they exist, to avoid this and any other public or civic duty which is foreign to religious life.39 Certainly this prohibition does not apply to service as military chaplains or any simi-lar type of ministry. The prohibition would seem to apply to accepting jury duty in criminal cases also, especially if they are capital offenses, when an exemption is possible. It seems most inappropriate that a relig-ious be in a position of determining the guilt of citizens and playing part in their incarceration or execution. Again, canon law recognizes that there can be exceptional cases in which the proper religious superior and ecclesiastical authority can grant permission to a religious to act contrary to the general canonical norm that the above activities are to be avoided. Conclusion Ecclesial authentication of charismatic forms of the Gospel life ex-isted from the beginning. At first, ,such approbation was given unoffi-cially and implicitly. Later, it became an official and explicit necessity. The religious life is a charismatic and an ecclesial form of public conse-cration. Religious institutes are public agencies of the Church which pre-sents the members as public witnesses of Gospel values. The personal and corporate lifestyles of religious, as well as their apostolic activities, are at the service of the Church and are supervised by their superiors and the bishops. Since religious are iri apublic form of consecrated life, they are expected, all things considered, to be recognizable, and to avoid those activities which muddle or confuse their ecclesiai image. Above all, religious are expected to be living examples of evangelical values: chastity for the sake of the kingdom; Gospel simplicity in lifestyle; hum-ble~ and Christ-like obedience; and complete dedication to a loving serv-ice of people in the name of the Church. The counterculturai witness of religious is meant to speak eloquently of a deep faith conviction that Je-sus is the way, and the truth and the life. NOTES See Carolyn Osiek in Vatican H and Its Documents: An American Reappraisal, ed., Witness of Religious Life / 6"/3 Timothy E. O'Connell0(Michael Glazier, Inc., Wilmington, Delware, 1986), pp. 86- 87. 2 Perfectae caritatis, 1; canon 575. 3 Lumen Gentium, 39. '~ Mutual Relations, II (Henceforth MR). 5 See Raymond Hostie, The Life and Death of Refigious Orders (CARA, Washing-ton, D.C., 1983), p. 21. 6 See The Dynamic Element in The Church (Herder, New "fork, 1964) p. 62; Lumen Gentium, 43; canon 573, §1 and §2. 7 Canon 586, §1. 8 Canons 573, §2, 575-579. 9 Canon 675, 93. l0 Canons 710-730. I~ Essential Elements, 33. (Henceforth EE). ~z Papal Message to the Plenary Assembly of CRIS, March 1980; EE, 33. ~3 Canon 663, 91. ~4 Canon 663, §2, §4. ~5 Canon 664. 16 Canons 607, 92 and 665. ~7 Canon 674. 18 Canon 665, 91. ~9 Canon 668, §3. 20Canon 679; see David F. O'Connor, "Two Forms of Consecrated Life; Religious and Secular Institutes," REvmw voR Rv.~.m~ous, 46, n. 2 (1986) pp. 205-219. z~ Christus Dominus, 33-35. ~ Canons 599, 602 and 607, §2. 23EE, 34. 24Canons 601,608 and 665. 25Canon 669. 26See Canon Law Digest, 7 (1975) pp. 534-535. 27Canon 675, §3. 28EE, I 0. 29Apostolicam actuositatem, 23; MR, 9 (a). 30Canons 394, 91 and 680; MR, Chapt. II. 3~ Canon 678. 32Canons 285 and 672. 33Canons 285, §3 and 672. 34 Canons 287 and 672. 35 See George Aschenbrenner, "Currents in Spirituality," Rv.w~w voR R~L~o~ous, 42, n. 2 (I 983), pp. 183-186. 36 CRIS, "Religi6us and Human Promotion," Canon Law Digest, 9 (1983), pp. 379-410; David F. O'Connor, "Religious in Politics," R~wEw ~oa R~L~6~ous, 41, n. 6 (1982), pp. 834-848. 37 Canons 285, §4 and 672. 38 Canons 286 and 672. 39 Canons 289 and 672. The Religious as "Sentry": A Reflection on the Prophet Ezekiel James Fitz, S.M. Father Fitz is a member of the Provincial Administration of his congregation's Cin-cinnati Province. An earlier article, "Religious Life as Acted Prophecy," appeared in the issue of November/December, 1982. Father Fitz may be addressed at the Mari-anist Provincialate; 4435 East Patterson Road; Dayton, Ohio 45430-1095. [~uring my twenty-one years as a religious, I have attended many vow cer-emonies in support of brothers and sisters saying "yes" to their call from the Lord. At these liturgies the first reading has often come from the Old Testament prophets--the call of Isaiah or Jeremiah, for exam-pie-- to indicate that those making profession identify with the call Of these prophets. But, I have yet to attend a ceremony where the call of Ezekiel is the Old Testament reading. In fact, it is not even one of the optional readings in the Lectionary for the Mass of Religious Profession. Yet, I believe the call of Ezekiel as sentry is an apt model and image for religious life today. The Value of an Image In recent years, theologians and spiritual writers have used images and models to describe the mysteries of our Christian faith. In so doing they have imitated Jesus himself, ~who often used images to evoke understanding: "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field.; the kingdom of heaven is like the yeast a woman took and mixed in with three measures of flour.; the kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed.; the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field.; the kingdom of heaven is like a drag- 674 The Religious as Sentry / 675 net. " These images helped Jesus' hearers enter into the mystery of faith. The Second Vatican Council used images when it described the mys-tery of the Church in its Dogmatic Constitution, Lumen Gentium. Im-ages like "the People of God," "a sheepfold," "the edifice of God," "our Mother," "the body of Christ," "a pilgrim in a foreign land," "a kind of sacrament" help elucidate the mystery of the Church. Avery Dulles' book, Models of the Church,~ uses images and mod-els in a similar way. Images and models, then, can be helpful ways to penetrate the richness of a mystery of our faith, to evoke an understand-ing of some complex reality of our tradition. Images and models have been helpful also in the understanding of religious life. The authors of Shaping the Coming Age of Religious Life,2 for example, have imagined religious in the different eras of religious life as ascetics, monks, mendicants, soldiers and apostolic servants. These images help elucidate the predominant understanding of religious life during the various eras of Church history. This article will explore the image of the prophet Ezekiel as sentry in the belief that it helps elucidate our contemporary understanding of religious life. The Call of Ezekiel In the third chapter of Ezekiel, we hear: "Child of the earth, I have appointed you as a sentry to the House of Israel. When you hear a word from my mouth, you shall warn them for me" (3:16). The third chapter continues to expand on this call. If God says to wicked people, "You shall surely die" (3:18), and Ezekiel does not warn them or speak out to dissuade them from their wicked conduct, the wicked people will die for their sins but God will hold Ezekiel responsible for their death. If Ezekiel speaks out and the people do not change, then Ezekiel is not held responsible. Not only is Ezekiel to challenge the wicked but he is also to be a prophet to the virtuous. If virtuous people turn away from virtue and Ezekiel does not warn them, then God will hold him responsible for their death. However, if Ezekiel does warn them, then the virtuous will surely live and Ezekiel will also save his life (3:16-21). This same de-scription of the prophet's role is repeated in Chapter 33:1-9. In explor-ing the image of prophet as sentry as appropriate for the role of the re-ligious in the world today, this article will first examine the role of the sentry, and then how this role might illuminate the role of religious in 676 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 the Church today. The Role of the Sentry The role of the sentry has four characteristics which I believe help explicate the mystery of the call to religious life. Call to See. The sentry's first responsibility is to see, to be watch-ful. This seeing is twofold: to announce the signs of good news and to warn of coming danger. The sentry is to be watchful for the signs of good news. For exam-ple, the sentry on a ship watches for the sign of land; the sentry at the gate of a medieval city watches for the signs of the coming of a beloved monarch in order to prepare the people for this great event; or the sentry watches for the runner returning from battle to share the news of victory. The sentry also needs to be watchful of signs of danger. The sentry on the ship needs to be conscious of the signs of bad weather so that the crew can be prepared to respond; the sentry at the gate needs to be con-scious of the signs of an approaching enemy. Call to Discern. A second responsibility of a sentry is to discern signs. Is the approaching rider friend or foe? Is the moving wind the sign of an approaching storm or the advent of good weather? Is it land that is seen or a mirage, a trick of the imagination? This discernment is an important responsibility. If a sentry is fearful or shallow, then he or she will proclaim good news that does not come to pass, or give false warn-ings of events that fail to materialize. People will no longer take seri-ously any message of the sentry. Responsibility to Proclaim. Once the se~lt.r.y has discerned the signs, the next responsibility is to announce the good news or the approach of danger to the people. When he or she has completed this proclamation, the responsibility for action is no longer just the sentry's but the respon-sibility of the entire community--as we have seen in the call of Ezekiel. In fact, the role of the sentry may now become secondary to the role of others who move the community to ,action. One Role Among Many. A sentry is often on the margins of society, outof synchronization with the rest of society, even while interdepend-ent with them.~As the sentry is watching, others are busy about other activ-ities.~ To have a sense of security, the people have need of the sentry. However, the sentry cannot survive without the people who are doing other activities (e.g., producing food, clothing and the other necessities of life), The sentry is, then, one role among many---different, but nei- The Religious as Sentry / 67'7 ther more nor less important than the other roles in society. The Religious as Sentry How does the role of the sentry, and more specifically, the call of Ezekiel, help us to understand religious life in the Church today? I be-lieve that the four characteristics just described can help illuminate the mystery of religious life. Call to See. Religious are called to be attentive, to be watchful. They do this first and foremost as people of prayer. Prayer, of course, is not ¯ the occupation of religious alone--all Christians are called to pray. How-ever, one cannot be a good religious without prayer, without attentive-ness to the religious dimension of life. Contemplation (to see clearly) has traditionally been part of religious life, whether one speaks of the con-templative life as manifested in the monastic movement or contemplation-in- action as manifested in service-oriented religious orders. I believe this responsibility of being attentive and watchful is very important to relig-ious today. Clearly we need people to read the signs of the times. Prayer-ful religious can contribute this gift to the Church. Call to Discern. For the religious to see clearly, there needs to be discernment. The first step in this discernment is honesty with oneself in order not to project danger where there is none or to characterize as hopeful movements that are contrary to the Gospel. A sentry who is fear-ful or shallow will give false warnings and proclamations. Eventually peo-ple will cease to take his or her word seriously. The practice of self-knowledge (achieved through prayer, examen, spiritual direction, and similar helps) will be essential to the religious who hopes to see clearly and proclaim what is seen in a way that will truly build up the commu-nity of the Church and the world. Discernment is not an easy task. What is heralded as good news by some is seen as danger by others. We witness this, for example, in the various responses to the development of new technology. Some see in this advancement the liberation of humankind; others feel we are being enslaved and controlled by these same technological advances. Discern-ment is an important task in the Church today, a task in which religious clearly have a role. Responsibility to Proclaim. Once the signs have been seen and dis-cerned, the religious has the responsibility of proclaiming the message, that is, the word of the Lord. If religious are good sentries, they will be able to proclaim the good news (the signs of the reign of God) and warn of danger (signs of the counterspirit). Ezekiel is a good model for relig-ious in this proclamation. Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 First of all, Ezekiel, like all the prophets, denounces and announces; he afflicts the comfortable and comforts the afflicted. His book not only contains oracles that are warnings of danger to the Chosen People (4- 24), the nations (25-32), and the shepherds of Israel (34), but powerful statements of hope such as the vision of dry bones (37) and the raising of a good shepherd for Israel (34). Secondly, Ezekiel is a good model for religious because he proclaims the word of God in both words and symbolic action. His signs are par-ables in action. For example, Ezekiel performs acts symbolic of siege and exile (4-5); prepares his baggage and digs a hole in the wall of the city as an act symbolic of exile (12); groans bitterly to symbolize the city's coming fall(12); neglects the normal mourning customs at the death of his wife as symbolic of the fact that Israel will not be able to mourn when the city of Jerusalem is besieged (24); and, finally, joins two sticks as a symbolic prophecy of the new covenant people (37). These actions raise questions among the people which allow the prophet to proclaim the word of the Lord: "Will you not tell us what all these things that you are doing mean for us?" (24:19; 39:18). This proclamation of God's word by prophetic action is a valuable way of viewing our living of the vowed life. The vows are symbolic ac-tions that often open to religious the possibility of proclaiming a word of the Lord. Religious life is acted prophecy.3 The lived vows can warn of danger and proclaim good news. For example, the vow of poverty can warn of the dangers of consumerism and can challenge the prevailing be-lief that more is better. It can also proclaim good news. The sharing of common goods lived by religious, for example, can proclaim that shar-ing is a life-giving alternative to greed and exclusive possess!on. The sym-bolic action of living the vows will hopefully lead others to ask questions: "Why do you do this? . What does this mean?" Thus re-ligious will have an opportunity to further proclaim the word of the Lord. As I mentioned earlier, once the sentry has proclaimed what has b~en seen, it is no longer solely his or her responsibility to act. This is clear in the call of Ezekiel. The role of Ezekiel is to be the sentry, the watcher and proclaimer. The responsibility to act is the responsibility of the en-tire people. The important thing for the religious is to proclaim clearly the message of the Lord in our world today, even though religious can-not ¯ control the response to the proclamation. As Ezekiel is told: "And whether they heed or resist--for they are a rebellious house--they shall know that a prophet has been among them" (2:5). The call to religious, then, is to stand for certain values and to speak those values in word, The Religious as Sentry / 679 and especially in deed, so that people will know that a word of the Lord has been spoken in their midst. Would it not have a tremendous impact on our modern world if people would know that a prophet has been among them? One Role Among Many. Another characteristic of the sentry is to have a uniquely different role, a role that can be out of synchronization with the rest of society. The vowed life of religious often places them out of synchronization with others. In the past this uniqueness has been explained as a form of life superior to other Christian lifestyles. The im-age of the sentry helps us image the complementarity of different life-styles. To say that religious have a unique role in the Church and society is not to say that it is better or more important than the roles of others. By their gifts, religious contribute to the world, but they are at the same time dependent on the gifts and lifestyles of others. All contribute to the common good. In the past, to be a sentry often meant to live on the margins of soci-ety. Religious, too, have often moved to the margins of society. Relig-ious houses were set up on the fringes of the city or separated from the city in the desert or countryside. There is a need for this type of sentry today. But signs of good news and omens of danger are also in the midst of society. In our day, when we read about terrorist attacks almost daily, we know that the greatest danger may come from within the city gates themselves. Those who can harm us live in our midst. Therefore, there will be need for religious immersed in society to read the signs of God's reign, that is, the movement of the Spirit in the midst of the world. At the same time, they will need to read the signs of peril and danger, that is, of the counterspirit in the midst of the world. Conclusion I believe that reflection upon Ezekiel and his call as sentry can en-rich the vision of the prophetic role of religious in our day, can be for religious a new way of imagining their role. Many religious will ask whether they are worthy or capable of such a call. Most honest religious will feel unworthy, as did Ezekiel, who fell upon his face when he was called (I :28). To take up the challenge can only be in response to God's call. "Child of the earth. Stand up! I wish to speak to you" (2: I). The call of the religious will be a response to the Spirit moving within. This will be the source of the authentic voca-tion to be a sentry for God's people and for the world. Finally, since the call to be a sentry will be a call from the Lord, he will be with the relig-ious on the journey. "Fear them not," (3:10) the Lord tells Ezekiel. The 680 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 Lord tells religious today the same: He will be with the sentry today, as he was with Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah and the other prophets. "I am with you always, yes, even to the end of time" (Mt 28:20). NOTES ~Avery Dulles, S.J., Mddels of the Church (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1974). 2Lawrence Cada, S.M. et al., Shaping the Coming Age of Religious Life (New York: The Seabury Press, 1979), pp. I 1-50~ 3See my article "Religious Life as Acted Prophecy" REvmw ~OR REt.mIOUS 41, n. 6, November/December, 1982, pp. 923-927. ,From Tablet to Heart: Internalizing New Constitutions I and II by Patricia Spillane, M.S.C. Address: Price: $1.25 per copy, plus postage. Review for Religious Rm 428 3601 Lindell Blvd. St. Louis, Missouri 63108 The Fathers in the Office of Readings: St. Cyprian of Carthage Anthony Daly, S.J. Father Anthony Duly has been a member of the faculty of the Languages Depart-ment of Saint Louis University. He has published several of these descriptive and brief biographies of Fathers of the Church who have been used in the Office of Read-ings of the Liturgy of the Hours. His last contribution appeared in the issue of Sep-tember/ October 1983. He may be addressed at Jesuit Hall; 3601 Lindell Blvd.; St. Louis, Missouri 63108. The third-century writings of St. Cyprian, bishop and martyr, are impor-tant today because they furnish otherwise unknown details of the life of both the Christians and pagans of his day and because they provide an illustration, hard to interpret though it is, of third-century African epis-copal attitudes toward the Roman papacy, a topic, however, which is not treated here. More directly, the writings reveal the character of St. Cyprian him-self, an interesting man with qualities people of any era can admire and imitate and who has many things to say which will never go out of date. What follows is first a brief overall sketch of St. Cyprian's life and then a more detailed account of certain matters which seemed likely to be of interest to readers of the Liturgy of the Hours. Well educated in the secular tradition of his times, Cyprian was a man who actively and thoroughly integrated his knowledge and experi-ence within a completely Christian ideology. He appears as an effective rhetorician, a competent bishop and administrator, a practical leader who knows how to make the best of a difficult situation, and a man of great personal charm, courage, and compassion. But perhaps his most strik-ing characteristic is his ability to face martyrdom, that of others and then 681 61~9 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 finally his own, not only with equanimity but even with joy and satis-faction. ~ The selections from his writings in the Liturgy of the Hours com-municate a spirit of firm religiosity which is rendered more attractive by human charm and more realistic by a moderate cast of mind. His mar-tyrdom adds to his words the weight of tested sincerity and makes more telling his exhortations to hope, courage, and joy. Thascius Caecilianus Cyprianus (c.205-258) was an African, born per-haps at Carthage, of wealthy pagan parents. He lived at Carthage where he was an orator and prominent citizen, and, like the more famous St. Augustine who for a time, but more than a century later, also lived in that North African city, Cyprian was a teacher of rhetoric. In midlife he took stock of his own character and of the repugnant pagan society in which he lived. This led him in the year 246 to become a Christian. He gave his money to the poor, took a vow of chastity, was ordained a priest, and in 248-49 he was consecrated bishop of Carthage. The ideal of personal integrity seems to have been what first attracted Cyprian to Christianity, an ideal which he found fulfilled for him there as a gift from God. He seems never to have lost it again, and secure in it, he began to devote himself to helping others. This was especially true as he performed his episcopal tasks of encouraging the faithful, teach-ing sound doctrine, and governing well, always seeking to preserve and foster the unity of the Church. But his desire to help others seems to have accompanied his conversion itself, for one of the first things he did as a Christian was write To Donatus, the purpose of which was to convert to Christianity his friend Donatus and others. Cyprian's election as bishop was unusual in that it occurred not very long after his conversion to Christianity. That the choice fell upon him seems to have been due to his obvious sincerity, his high standing in the local community, his eminent personal qualifications, and the fact that he had already published at least one and perhaps as many as three of his Christian writings.2 Although the exact process of his election is not known, it is clear that it involved the agreement of a majority of the clergy, of the neighboring bishops who assembled to ordain him, and of the laity who were his strongest supporters. Confidence in Adversity His episcopal career was stormy right from the time of his election as bishop. There were some who opposed selecting him, and among them were a certain Novatus and some other elderly presbyters at St. Cyprian of Carthage [ 683 Carthage, who, although they may have had other motives as well, prob-ably were jealous of Cyprian. Soon, in 250, the Roman emperor Decius instituted the first truly sys-tematic and universal persecution of Christians. Commissions were set up throughout the empire which were to witness certain acts of worship of the pagan gods which were to be performed by everyone as a relig-ious test. Some of the Ch?istians complied; others were able to secure official certificates of compliance (libelli) even though they had not in fact worshiped; still others refused to comply and were subject to impris-onment, torture, or even death. Cyprian was among yet a fourth class of Christians who avoided the confrontation by going into hiding. He was criticized for this, but, as he explained it, when the edict against Christians was promulgated, the pagan populace at Carthage called for him to be brought forward. He fled not so much for his own safety, he explained, but in order to avoid a public uprising which he feared would endanger his flock. He further explained that despite his physical sepa-ration he kept in close touch with his people by letter.3 Some of these communications are included in the collection of his extant letters. In this, in other episcopal decisions, and in the general conduct of his personal life, St. Cyprian displays remarkable self-confidence. In this episode, he gives his reasons for withdrawing from Carthage, expects them to be accepted, and does not seem at all embarrassed to return, show his face, and even to admonish in certain matters those who had suffered or were still in prison for the faith, the confessors. Cyprian found it necessary to warn the confessors not to try to usurp the role of the bishop in granting ecclesiastical pardon to those who had given in to the authorities, the lapsed. Not altogether unreasonably, the custom was gaining ground according to which some of the lapsed were securing from the confessors requests for full and immediate reinstate-ment in the Church, and these requests, either written or oral, were gen-erally being honored, thus gaining quasi-hierarchical authority. In addi-tion to cautioning the confessors in this matter, Cyprian also admonished them not to give in to softness and vice once their trials had ended. Cyprian'.s is an attractive self-confidence, not haughty, a self-confidence based on truth and courageous love. One wonders if it en-tailed an inner struggle for Cyprian; if so, it is part of his private life and is not reflected in his writings. The Novatian Schism Probably because the severity of the persecution was unpopular with most pagans, and because the courage of the martyrs was probably at- Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 tracting enough converts to make the persecution self-defeating, it was ended early in 251. At that point Cyprian was faced with a controversy over how the bishops and clergy themselves should treat the lapsed, both those who had obeyed the edict and sacrificed to idols, and those who had obtained fraudulent certificates, or libelli. Cyprian, who adopted moderate and individualized attitude toward those who had lapsed in these ways, was able to make his view prevail'. His guiding principle was that those guilty of serious sin should be given an opportunity to achieve genuine repentance, a state of soul which he thought a sinner could ex-perience only through undergoing a suitable period of penance. But at the same time he insisted that sin can in fact be forgiven and that no re-pentant person should be deprived of hope, that each should be readmit-ted to the Church at the appropriate time. Against Cyprian were both those who wanted everyone readmitted to the Church without further com-plication and those who advised that reconciliation with the Church be forever withheld from those who had fallen. Chief among the proponents of this last course of action were the No-vatianists, so called because they were followers of Novatian, a rigorist Roman bishop who claimed the papal throne. Because his claim was re-jected by the Church at large and because of his rigorism, he and his fol-lowers became schismatic, and their rival church, widespread through-out the empire, was not entirely reconciled with Catholics until the end of the seventh century. Baptism by Heretics Under the Emperor Gallus (25 ! -53) a second persecution took place which was itself followed, in the years 255-57, by another major con-troversy, this time over the validity of baptism administered by heretics, chiefly the Novatianists. The difficulty arose over whether those origi-nally baptized by Novatianists and others not in communion with the Church should be rebaptized when they were accepted into the Catholic communion. Cyprian championed the losing cause, maintaining that the baptisms administered by heretics had no value. He appears still to have been of this opinion when, under the Emperor Valerian (253-60), a third persecution cost him his life. Although the Church later determined that baptism administered by non-Catholics is valid provided certain elements are present, on the un-derstanding that it is Christ himself who truly baptizes rather than the in-dividual who happens to be administering the rites, the whole matter was not yet worked out in Cyprian's day. Clearly he too would attribute the effects of the sacraments to Christ, but in his mind heresy and schism, St. Cyprian of Carthage / 685 since they involve separation from the Church, are tantamount to reject-ing Christ. How, he reasoned, could someone who rejects Christ bap-tize in his name? By the same token, such a person "shall not come to the rewards of Christ," even if he suffers martyrdom.4 His position on the matter underscores the importance he placed on unity in the Church. In the year 258 Cyprian ended his life in stirring fashion, boldly em-bracing his martyrdom. The account of his death forms the alternate sec-ond reading of the Office of Readings on his feast day. It is celebrated on September 16, along with that of Pope Cornelius whom Cyprian sup-ported against the rival claimant to the papacy mentioned above, Nova-tian. Writings Cyprian's treatise On the Lord's Prayer furnishes the largest single group of selections from his writings in the Liturgy of the Hours. These are nearly matched in volume by extracts from his Letters, and the ma-terial is rounded out by single samples from several works: On the D?ess of Virgins, On the Value of Patience, On Man's Mortality, and the Ex-hortation to Martyrdom, Addressed to Fortunatus. Finally there is the description of his martyrdom by an unknown author, taken from The Pro-consular Acts. There are eight other works by Cyprian not included in the Liturgy. Of these, To Demetrianus is a work similar to the longer, more famous City of God by St. Augustine. Both works deny that Christians are to be held responsible for wars and natural disasters, and attribute them instead to the vices of the pagans. Another title of Cyprian's often likened to a writing of St. Augustine, in this instance the Confessions, is To Donatus, mentioned earlier, which describes Cyprian's conversion to Christianity from paganism. Here Cyp-rian rejoices in his new life which he attributes to the cleansing of sav-ing water and the effects of "a quickening act of divin~ grace." Through power given by God he has been enabled to abandon lavish banquets, expensive clothing, and public honors in favor of a private life, simple clothes, and thrift. Although he once thought he could never be rid of his sins which he had come to indulge as "proper and belonging to" him, he had left hard drinking behind, together with exaggerated self-importance, anger, covetousness, cruelty, ambition and lust. He empha-sizes that his new way of life is not to be attributed to himself, but to God.5 As has been mentioned, because it recounts Cyprian's conversion from sin through the power of God, and because he wrote it to help oth- 61~6 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 ers experience a similar conversion, To Donatus has been compared to the Confessions of St. Augustine. Nevertheless, there are three sharp dif-ferences between the two works. Most obvious is their difference in length, Cyprian's work being much shorter. Second, Augustine is spe-cific in recounting his sins and the steps by which he became a Chris-tian, whereas Cyprian summarizes his experiences in general terms. Third, Augustine addresses God directly in the Confessions and always emphasizes his personal love for God. Cyprian addresses his friend Do-natus; he attributes to God his newfound mastery over himself, but he does not dwell on his relationship with God. Instead, his attention cen-ters on treasuring his newly purified way of life and on contrasting it with the wickedness of the pagan society which he has left behind. Cyprian pities the world and gives thanks to God for having escaped from it with its robbers, pirates, wars, and gladiatorial contests.6 He be-lieves the themes of the tragedies presented in the theater corrupt private morals: parricide, incest, and adultery which "is learned as it is seen"; and these things are all the worse because they are presented with the approval of public authority. Men make themselves effeminate on stage, and Venus, Mars, and Jupiter are depicted as unchaste, Jupiter even ad-vancing to "the raping of young boys . Ask now whether he who looks upon this can be healthy-minded or chaste. One imitates the gods whom he venerates. For these poor wretches sins become even religious acts. ' ' 7 Further evils in society include homosexuality, prostitution, litigious-ness, bribery and collusion, fraud, forgery, perjury, and the falsification of charges. In court the wicked fare better than the innocent. To secure a place of prominence in society, men become sycophants, spendthrifts on public spectacles, or they build up estates, dispossessing the poor, and must live in fear of thieves and lawsuits.8 Cyprian recounts all of this in order to show the goodness of God who saves us from becoming wicked or vain.9 The Christian way to live in such a world is to raise one's eyes from earth to heaven, to be next to God in mind, to ignore what is seemingly sublime and great in human affairs, and to be greater than the world, for a religiously oriented way of life is a greater prize than anything the world has to offer. Five other works not included in the Liturgy of the Hours have fairly self-explanatory titles: The Lapsed, The Unity of the Church, Works and Almsgiving, Jealousy and Envy, and That the Idols Are Not Gods, a work sometimes considered spurious.~° A final work not used in the Liturgy is To Quirinus: Three Books of Testimonies. This treatise, which seems St. Cyprian of Carthage actually to represent two separate works by Cyprian which were com-bined later, perhaps by someone else, lists scriptural passages designed to show that the Christians h~ve inherited the promises made to the Jews, texts which illustrate the mysteries of Christ, and passages designed to show how to live the Christian life. Interpreting Cyprian Three aspects of the life of St. Cyprian seem particularly significant for interpreting and appreciating his writings: first, he was a rhetorician; second, he became a bishop; and then finally, he died a martyr. As a rheto-rician he knows how to use words to achieve the result he wants; but he uses them in a less literal sense than does a philosopher or a speculative theologian, and he gives more weight to various ideas and attitudes than would a disinterested writer who is unaffected by the press of circum-stances. Thus it is often necessary to consider carefully the context in which he is writing, and to subordinate the literal meaning of what he says to the effect he seems to be trying to achieve,, A bishop's preoccupation with his duty to guide, instruct, protect, and correct his people permeates the writings of Cyprian. In this office, it is obvious that he is motivated first and last by his love of Christ and the Church, and that he views everything else from a Christian perspec-tive. Constantly he shows good common sense and a sane grasp of the limits and potential of human nature. Finally, the atmosphere of hostility to the faith in which Cyprian ex-ercised his episcopacy'and which finally resulted in his death shaped and sharpened his vision of the world and how it is to be approached; this may well be the most important factor influencing his strong emphasis on eternal life. He quotes the Scriptures, both Old Testament and New, with a natu-ral ease which indicates true familiarity; having made a thorough study of them at the time of his conversion to Christianity, he seems to have continued this study throughout his career as a bishop. Quotations are always at hand to reinforce and embellish the points he wants to make. Among his works are the To Quirinus described above, and another col-lection of Scripture texts briefly mentioned as a work quoted in the Lit-urgy of the Hours, the Exhortation to Martyrdom, Addressed to Fortu-natus. Here, under twelve headings, are texts bearing generally on mar-tyrdom which a preacher or writer could use to encourage Christians liv-ing under the threat of persecution. Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 Literary Style Cyprian's style is clear, orderly, and often ornate, marked by a lib-eral but tasteful use of rhetorical figures such as parallel clauses whose grammatical structures are similar, phrases ending in the same sound, and the strategic repetition of words. His love of metaphors, some of which are quite engaging, is not obscured by translation into English. Vir-gins, for instance, are termed blossoms;~ like the emperor or one of his generals, God watches us doing battle with evil;~2 "the commands of the Gospel. are the rudder for keeping us on the right course";~3 and the Christian victorious over "earth's torment and suffering" is com-pared to a soldier returning home in triumph after defeating the enemy. ~4 On the Lord's Prayer This treatise, more than a third of,which has been included in the Lit-urgy ofothe Hours, has been praised throughout history as a fine com-mentary, certainly among the best non-technical ones ever written. Three points from the material in the Liturgy seem especially note-worthy. The first is Cyprian's insistence that prayer should have a social dimension: "We do not say 'My Father, who art in heaven,' nor 'Give me this day my daily bread'. Rather, we pray., not for one in-dividual but for all. For the people of God are all one." ~5 Second, there is Cyprian's sober awareness that we all sin every day and stand in con-stant need of sanctification. 16 A third point is Cyprian's stirring expres-sion of Christian steadfastness. When he speaks of accepting suffering and even death with Christ who suffered for us, we are reminded of the terrible hostility which confronted him and his fellow Christians.~7 Portions of the work not quoted in the Liturgy show that Cyprian's caution about the world is remarkably well balanced. This is especially true if the pagan culture in which he lived is fully taken into account. For instance, despite superficial similarity between pagan Stoicism and his remarks about rising above the world, Cyprian clearly shows that he does not underestimate the value of material creation; on the contrary, he advises us to pray that by the help of God we experience a harmony between the flesh an°d the spirit, the earthly and' the heavenly; and he un-derstands that Christ renews and preserves humanity. ~8 ~;imilarly, in his warning about the entangling effect of riches, Cyprian may have been more emphatic than he would otherwise have been because he realized that the thought of losing property kept many from confessin~ Christ dur-ing the persecution. 19 Off the negative side, the work includes an embar-rassingly strong and wholesale condemnation of the Jews; Cyprian goes so far as to say that they can no longer call God their Father, since they St. Cyprian of Carthage / 689 rejected and killed Christ.2° On the Dress of Virgins The final work to be considered here is On the Dress of Virgins, ex-cerpts from which make up the second reading in the Common of Vir-gins. (There is an alternate second reading taken from the Decree on the Renewal of Religious Life of the Second Vatican Council.) In the excerpts (chs. 3-4, 22, 23) St. Cyprian describes virgins adorned with right conduct as beautiful, as "the image of God that re-flects the holiness of the Lord," and as "the most illustrious members of Christ's flock." He interprets the virginal life as beginning to be "now what we shall all be in the future," in the kingdom of heaven, he means, where there is no marriage. As a matter of fact, Cyprian's thought goes even further. He sees virginity as a part of the image of the heavenly man, Christ, to whom we are encouraged to conform ourselves. Virgins are "equal to God's angels." ~ Humbled by the thought of them, and not, he says, in a spirit of cen-sure or even of authority, but out of concern for them, he exhorts them to "persevere in chastity and virginity." Having renounced the pleas-ures of the flesh, "they should not strive to adorn themselves or give pleasure to anyone but the Lord." In this way, having passed "through this world without the world's infection," they "will receive a glorious prize" for their virtue.2~ The passages from this treatise which are included in the Liturgy of the Hours express sound and encouraging attitudes good for all time; some of the material not included sounds strange to modern ears. This material, because it is historically conditioned on the one hand or rheto-rically condemnatory on the other, is harder to understand. . Although the excerpts seem to concern women rather than men, else-where in the treatise Cyprian states that he intends .his general remarks for "men as well as women, boys as well as girls, every sex and every age."22 This does not mean, however, that he viewed men and women as equal in every respect, or even that he disagreed with the traditional Roman view of women as the weaker sex. For instance, regarding mar-tyrs in The Lapsed, he says, "Joining.~the victory of their men, come the women too, triumphing over the world and over their sex alike."23 So too, he uses as an. argumeht on behalf of virginity that it frees a woman not.only from the pains of childbirth but also from the dominion of a husband.24 On the warrant of Scripture Cyprian insists that physical adornments should be rejected by virgins, who should strive to please God rather than 690 / Review for Religious, September-October, 1987 men.25 Furthermore, women are to avoid being an occasion of sin for men.26 Even if a woman has wealth, it is false to argue that she should make use of it to improve her physical appearance; rather, things "that have been acquired in the world and will remain here with the world, should be despised (contemni) just as the world itself is despised."27 In-deed, virgins should be like martyrs in that they should avoid the "wide and broad roads" in favor of the "hard and steep path which ascends to glory," for the devil uses allurements and pleasures "that he may kill.' ,28 Today many would consider the judicious and modest use of makeup simply a part of formal dress. From this point of view Cyprian's invec-tive against necklaces, earrings, makeup, and red articles of clothing seems overdrawn. But for Cyprian such things are not innocent. Not only for virgins but for all women makeup and earrings are, to his mind, in-ventions of the devil: "the work of God and his creature and image should in no way be falsified;., everything that comes into existence is the work of God. whatever is changed, is the work of the devil."29 The difference between today's view and his seems to stem neither from licentiousness in us nor from prudishness in him, but from Cyprian's an-cient cultur

Richard Richards ; The Weber and Davis County Communities Oral History Collection include interviews of citizens from several different walks of life. These interviews were conducted by Stewart Library personnel, WeberState University faculty and students, and other members of the community. The histories cover various topics and chronicle the personal everyday life experiences and other recollections regarding the history of the Weber and Davis County areas. ; 81p.; 29cm.; 2 bound transcripts; 4 file folders. 1 video disc: digital; 4 3/4 in. ; Oral History Program Richard Richards Interviewed By Rebecca Ory Hernandez 7 August 2012 13 August 2012 24 September 2012 i ii Oral History Program Weber State University Stewart Library Ogden, Utah Richard Richards Interviewed by Rebecca Ory Hernandez 7 August 2012 13 August 2012 24 September 2012 Copyright © 2013 by Weber State University, Stewart Library iii Mission Statement The Oral History Program of the Stewart Library was created to preserve the institutional history of Weber State University and the Davis, Ogden and Weber County communities. By conducting carefully researched, recorded, and transcribed interviews, the Oral History Program creates archival oral histories intended for the widest possible use. Interviews are conducted with the goal of eliciting from each participant a full and accurate account of events. The interviews are transcribed, edited for accuracy and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewees (as available), who are encouraged to augment or correct their spoken words. The reviewed and corrected transcripts are indexed, printed, and bound with photographs and illustrative materials as available. Archival copies are placed in the University Archives, which also houses the original recording so researchers can gain a sense of the interviewee's voice and intonations. Project Description The Weber and Davis County Communities Oral History Collection include interviews of citizens from several different walks of life. These interviews were conducted by Stewart Library personnel, Weber State University faculty and students, and other members of the community. The histories cover various topics and chronicle the personal everyday life experiences and other recollections regarding the history of the Weber and Davis County areas. ____________________________________ Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account. It reflects personal opinion offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ____________________________________ Rights Management All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to the Stewart Library of Weber State University. No part of the manuscript may be published without the written permission of the University Librarian. Requests for permission to publish should be addressed to the Administration Office, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, Utah, 84408. The request should include identification of the specific item and identification of the user. It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows: Richards, Richard, an oral history by Rebecca Ory Hernandez, 7 and 13 August 2012 and 24 September 2012, WSU Stewart Library Oral History Program, University Archives, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, UT. Richard Richards October 2012 1 Abstract: Richard "Dick" Richards, WSU alum, attorney, author and Republican Party National Committee Chairman (1981), grew up in Ogden, Utah and became involved with politics as a young man in high school. Richard is now retired and resides in South Ogden, Utah after spending most of his political career in Washington D.C. He sat down with Rebecca Ory Hernandez from Weber State University to discuss his life growing up in Ogden, his family, education, career and devotion to Weber State University. Richard endowed the "Richard Richards Institute of Politics and Ethics" at Weber State University which awards scholarships to high school students, and currently serves on the board. He and his wife, Annette Bott Richards, have five children. ROH: Today we are beginning an oral history with Richard Richards in his home in South Ogden, Utah. My name is Rebecca Ory Hernandez. Why don't we go ahead with you just stating your name and where this interview is being held? RR: My name is Richard Richards, most people call me Dick. I'm in my home at 5273 Daybreak in South Ogden. I'm prepared to discuss my early history with Rebecca and I look forward to it. ROH: When and where were you born? RR: I was born in Ogden at the old Dee Hospital on May 14, 1932. Nearly all my brothers and sisters were born at the same hospital and had the same doctor, but that was a long time ago. The hospital is now gone. ROH: Where did you grow up? 2 RR: I grew up in South Ogden. I lived in Ogden until I was about 12 years old, and then moved to South Ogden and lived here until I was drafted into the army in 1952. ROH: What part of South Ogden? RR: My first home in South Ogden was 3999 Norton Avenue. That's just next to 40th Street and 40th Street was the dividing line between Ogden and South Ogden. My father bought that home during the war. It was a 1,000 square foot home and I had seven sisters and a brother. So, 11 of us lived in this 1,000 square foot home. There were a couple of bedrooms in the basement that accommodated us, but 11 people in that small home. I can't even remember how we ate dinner. There's no way we could have eaten at the same time because the kitchen wasn't that big. I have no recollection of how exactly we operated in the home, but we lived there for several years. ROH: Where did you fall in the family line-up of children? RR: My brother was the oldest child and I was next to him about a year and a half later. All seven girls came after me. Four of them were born in the month of May one year apart, so the family grew rapidly and it was all girls after my brother and me. ROH: I can't imagine having that many children under one roof. RR: I don't know how we did it. I really don't. I had one sister that was really fastidious and she needed the bathroom for a long time. We agreed that she could have 3 the bathroom for an hour starting at six o'clock in the morning. After that the family had it. ROH: Are all of your siblings still around? RR: One of them passed away. That's the one I was talking about. All of the others are scattered around from California, Idaho, Oregon and I have two sisters living in the Ogden area. ROH: Do you stay in touch with them? RR: We have family reunions. We just had one at Park City in July. We had 123 family members there. We've been doing this for about 20 years and we have not had one death in the family or one child born with severe disabilities out of all 153 of us. We have been a blessed group. We have MBA's, Ph.D's, and a couple of doctors. We've got some pretty good children and grandchildren. My father came from the coal mining camps of Utah when he was in the tenth grade. He didn't graduate from high school. He was tired of living in the coal mines and said, "I'm not going to be a miner, I'm getting out of here." He went up to Salt Lake and got a job helping a sign painting company called Bird and Jex Company. Later on, he decided he didn't want to work for them and he set up his own company here in Ogden. His first shop was no bigger than this living room, but he's the guy that brought us out of the coal mines. ROH: What was the name of the sign shop? 4 RR: Richards Sign Company. That was a long time ago, but that business still carries the name. It's gone through three generations. My father had a stroke many years ago and as a result he couldn't work so he sold his business to a guy by the name of Derek Warner. He ran it for some period of time, then he retired and gave it to his son. His son retired and now it's the next generation working the Richards Sign Company. The company was so well respected that no matter who owned it, they wanted to keep the name. It's still there on Grand Avenue and a bustling business, but it's different. They don't even have a paint brush down there anymore because everything is done by computer. When my dad sold it, we did it all by hand. ROH: Did you learn how to paint signs as well? RR: I did and I earned my living painting signs while I was in law school. Even after I graduated and I was practicing law, the income was so meager that at night I painted signs to make some money to take care of my family. I always hoped that potential clients didn't see me painting signs or they'd wonder about my ability as a lawyer. ROH: That's interesting. What about your mother? RR: My mother lived in Ogden. She met my father in a church activity and her father was a railroader and they lived down on Grant Avenue. My mother did graduate from high school and I don't know if she worked before they were married. ROH: Do you recall which high school she graduated from? 5 RR: It would have been Ogden High School because that's the only one there was. ROH: Okay. They met at a church activity, but can you be more specific? RR: Apparently, it was a Golden Green Ball, a dance of some kind where my father met my mother or shortly after because they participated in the dance and won a prize. A great uncle of mine introduced them. AR: What I understand is that she had caught his eye and she was walking along the street and he pulled over and said, "Could I have a date?" She said, "Yes, if you'll go to church with me." They did enter a contest with the Golden Green Ball and they won. ROH: Did you inherit their love of dancing? RR: No. I don't' dance. ROH: I'm surprised. I thought all politicians liked to dance. AR: He's got a son that dances. ROH: What were some of the things you did as a young person? RR: Before we moved out to South Ogden, I lived on Monroe and we played Kick-the- Can and all kinds of games in the streets. We didn't have television of course. We didn't pay too much attention to radio so we played outside. We played with each other. ROH: Where did you go to school? 6 RR: I went to school first at Quincy for the first grade and so on. Later on, I went to Madison. I was at Madison for a while, then my family went to South Ogden and I went to Riverdale Junior High School. After Riverdale I went to Weber High School. ROH: So you lived on Monroe for a little while? RR: Yes on 26th and Monroe. The family lived there, but as the family grew and more kids were born in the family we had to find a bigger place and my dad bought a house in South Ogden during the war for about $5,000. The house we lived in on Monroe is now a little parking lot for a neighbor. There's nothing there, but it was a very small yard and very small house. ROH: Are there any memories that you have from being at Quincy or Madison that you'd like to share? RR: Not at Qunicy, but when I moved to Madison, I was the newcomer and they had to see whether I was tough enough to be in that environment. They picked fights with me and forced me to fight. I wasn't going to fight. Kids carried me over to the park across the street and I was to fight with a guy and I beat him up, so I was successful there. Then, I had to try one more and I got in a fist fight during art class. The teacher came down, banged our heads together and stopped us. I punched the guy in the nose and his nose was bleeding. I was crying and I didn't want to fight. The teacher came down and knocked our heads together. The guy I was fighting hauled off and punched her and knocked her down. He was expelled from school. They didn't do anything to me because they knew I didn't 7 want to fight with this guy and that was apparent. He was kind of a bully and it was good. I passed the test fighting those two guys and from then on I was accepted. ROH: I just can't imagine that. Annette said she had something she wanted to share. AR: An interesting thing, I was at Quincy School and I was standing over by the water fountain. His brother, Jim, was a year older than me and Dick was a year younger than me. I remember thinking, "Oh, that's Jimmy Richard's little brother." He was running around. That was our first meeting and then he went to Madison and I continued on at Quincy. ROH: Okay. Were there any favorite subjects that stood out to you at that time as a young boy? RR: I liked the art classes, but we didn't have many of them until I went to high school. I was not a good student. I was a troublemaker and I just got by as far as the academics were concerned. There was always trouble, and a lot of it was my fault. I remember when I went to Riverdale Junior High School we rode the bus from South Ogden out to Riverdale and there was a kid in the neighborhood by the name of Tommy James. Tommy crowded in front of us in line for the bus. As I walked past him he took a seat up front and I hauled off and smacked him in the back of the head. When we got to Riverdale I chased him down and picked a fight with him and he just beat the hell out of me. That was the only time I was ever really beat up. He just kept pounding me, the big tall guy with long arms and I would be swinging at him and I'd be missing him by about four of five inches. 8 Incidentally, the principal came down and grabbed us and took us up to the principal's office. He said he was going to give us the board of education. He had a board that he used to paddle kids with and the board had holes in it so he could get a good swift whack. He asked what happened and I owned up. I said, "I picked the fight, it's my fault." I guess that impressed him and he said, "Well, get going and get back to class and I don't want any more of this." ROH: In junior high, Did you have any particular subject that you were fond of? RR: No, I was just getting by doing what I could do. ROH: Being a kid. RR: We rode the bus and I always rose a rumpus on the bus, so the driver kicked me out and said, "You're going to walk home." I said, "Okay." Instead of walking home I went around to the back of the bus and climbed in the window on the side he couldn't see. I rode in the bus with him until we got to Ogden and we got to the bus stop. I jumped out the window and ran up front and said, "Haha Clink, I beat you." He felt bad that he was going to make me walk and before he left he said, "Hey where's the Richards kid, I was only joking I wasn't going to make him walk." I played a joke on Clink. Incidentally, I've had an occasion to work with the Fernilius' again in my business. When we get to that I'll tell you. ROH: You went to Weber High. Tell me about that experience. RR: Well, I shaped up. ROH: Did your parents have a car growing up? 9 RR: Yes. In fact, I remember when I was six years old my brother and I had our tonsils taken out. We went to the doctor's office in the old First Security Bank building and had our tonsils removed. My father picked us up in his brand new Pontiac car. He paid $600 and got a beautiful blue Pontiac car. That's the first car I can remember my folks had. ROH: When you were young, do you remember where you went shopping for new supplies and clothes and things like that? RR: As a kid, I didn't do that. I don't remember that. As I grew up a little bit I remember being in town because I would go to the paramount theater that had the Popeye club. On Saturdays, they'd have Popeye and a series of the Lone Ranger or something and I remember going to town for that. Other than that, I don't remember going to town. ROH: In town are you talking about Ogden? RR: Yes, I'm still talking about Ogden. These were younger years. ROH: Is this the 25th Street area? RR: Yes. Actually there were several theaters in town at that time. There was an Orpheum, a Colonial, Lyseum, The Egyptian, and the Paramount. That's five theaters. Most of the kids went to the Paramount because that had the Popeye Club and the series. Movies cost about a dime and I would work around the yard and I'd get a dime or 25 cents and I was able to go to the movies. ROH: Okay, so we're going to go back to high school now. 10 RR: Before high school, let me talk about Riverdale Junior High School because that was really a turning point for me. That was a rough school. When I went there I was in the 7th and 8th grades and we were rough on teachers there. We drove a couple of teachers out of the room crying. There were several of us that were involved in this kind of stuff. ROH: How did you do that? RR: Just by not paying attention or throwing spit balls or whatever. We drove a couple of substitute teachers out of there. We were upstairs in a room that was called Idaho because it was kind of shaped like Idaho. My friend and I were in the back of the room raising the devil and there were two kids in the middle of the room that were raising Cain and the teacher came in and he just stood there with his arms folded for a few minutes waiting for everybody to shut up. They didn't shut up so he walked down the aisle and gave each of these kids a karate chop on the side of the head and whacked them in the kidney and knocked both of them out. Both of the kids fell with their faces on the desk and my friends and I shut up. That cured us. He really knocked the two kids out. One of the kids' families sued him because when he hit him in the kidneys he bruised him. This teacher didn't say anything and I don't know what happened to him, but I didn't see him again. That was sort of a turning point for a lot of us. After I left junior high school and went to Weber I shaped up. It was a 180 degree change for me. ROH: How many kids were in your class in junior high? RR: I would say there were 20 or something like that. 11 ROH: That was a good-sized class. Is there anything else from junior high that you can recall? What was your favorite part about being in school? RR: Recess. I remember I was supposed to be in arithmetic class, but before the class started I went down to the shop. There was nobody in there except a few kids. The teacher wasn't there and I had never had any experience with some of these tools like the buzz saw. I picked up a chunk of wood and I was going to cut it, but I put it in the wrong way in the saw. It threw the wood and knocked the window out of the class. It would have killed a kid if it hit him. I didn't know what I was doing. I got out of there and sneaked into my arithmetic class by crawling on my hands and knees to the desk so the teacher wouldn't see me coming in. It was a funny school, I had a friend called Toshi Shiba and he went around the junior high school with a water gun and he would shoot the light bulbs and it would pop them. In those days they didn't have a chandelier glass over them, they just had a globe. My friend went around shooting those things and the shop teacher caught him and grabbed him and shook him up and said, "I never did like you Japs anyway." Nothing ever happened as a result of that, but today that would be a disaster. ROH: It sounds like you were a bit precocious. RR: I was not a good little boy. I never did anything really bad, but I did a lot of things that were border line. ROH: Did your parents ever get called to school? 12 RR: No, and I never told them when I had a couple of teachers assault me in junior high school. One guy was a music teacher and he was in the auditorium with the music class and a kid in that class had stolen my baseball mitt. I spotted it because it had my name on it. He had used a leather puncher to punch holes in it so that my name would not be visible, but I saw it anyway. I went into the class and confronted the kid about the mitt. The teacher said, "You get out of here." I said, "I'm not going until I get my mitt." He came down and grabbed me by the shirt and took me out in the hall and he was slapping me on the side of the face front-hand and back-hand. He hit me several times, but I never told my parents about that. You know, that just happened. It was not uncommon in the schools for a teacher to whack a kid. ROH: That is true. Moving on to high school at Weber High, where was Weber High? RR: Weber High School was on 12th and Washington Blvd. We had to take a bus from home to school. When I got into high school I really settled down. It was a major change in my life. I was elected sophomore class president when I went out there. Right out of this junior high school environment to the high school and we had kids from other junior high schools come in from Eden and Huntsville. I don't know the circumstances, but I was elected sophomore class president. ROH: You don't recall running for president? RR: No, I don't recall any of that except that I was elected and I was in a sign painting class and I painted some signs for sophomore assemblies. I misspelled the word "sophomore." They said, "It's got an "o" in it." 13 ROH: You said you got more serious in high school. What were your academics like? RR: I was a good student. It was the beginning of a new life for me. AR: One of the teachers said that Dick was the worst and best student that she ever had. ROH: Did you go to high school together? AR: No, I went to Ogden High School. ROH: Did you have a favorite subject in high school? RR: Yes, I liked the debate class and I participated in the debates and extemporaneous competitions and I did well. So, I did a lot of it. It's interesting because the debate teacher at Weber High School was the same principal that dragged me up to the principal's office when I was at Riverdale. ROH: Is that right? He moved from the other school to that school. He must have had some kind of impact on you. Who were your friends in high school? RR: I had several that lived out here in South Ogden like, George Palmer, Carl Hassel and Bud Reed. I had a lot of friends. We did things in a group out here. Nobody played alone. ROH: What were some of the things you were involved in other than debate? Were you involved in any clubs or activities? RR: No, because I worked after school. Instead of taking the school bus, I would take the city bus and go from 12th Street down to my dad's shop and work after 14 school. I didn't have any time for any of the athletics. I did win the intramural boxing championship for my weight when I was in high school. I didn't play football, basketball, or baseball or anything. Those intramurals took place within the classroom for the most part. ROH: So you continued to fight in high school. You got into boxing? RR: Not a lot, but we had an intramurals program in boxing and I won that in my class. I boxed with the kids that were in the other class. I also wrestled. I met another kid in the other class wrestling, I got down on the mat like you're supposed to and he was over me and the referee said, "Go!" He pinned me so fast I didn't even know what I was doing. I was out of that competition in 15 seconds, just as long as it took for the referee to count me out. This kid was a skinny kid with a glass eye and he went on to win the state championship in his weight a couple of years. He was a very good wrestler. I think his name was Garcia. ROH: So, if you ran for sophomore class president, you were interested in politics at that time. RR: Yes, and that is one of the things that I gravitated toward was the speech class and the debate and that sort of thing. About that time I had developed my philosophy as a Republican. One of my debate partners was a democrat, one that I called the yellow dog democrat. He would rather vote for a yellow dog than a Republican and that's still his philosophy. My father talked politics to us at the dinner table. He talked about a conservative writer at that time called Westbrook 15 Pegler. Pegler was a conservative and he hated the Roosevelts. Most of his column was anti-Franklin and Eleanor and my dad talked about that. There were also some things happening in our life that got me to be a conservative. During that time when we were growing up, we had a coal furnace. The coal man would come to your house, open the coal chute and empty the coal out in the basement. John L. Lewis was the head of the coal miners' union and he called a strike. When he called a strike, we couldn't get coal and everybody complained about that. Even my grandmother and my father complained about it. My father said, "I'm not going to be at the mercy of John L Lewis," and he changed the coal furnace to a gas furnace. John L. Lewis was really big at that time. ROH: When was this? RR: I would say in the early 1940's. Coal mining was a big deal. My grandfather was a coal miner and he still lived down in Carbon County. Coal miners liked John L. Lewis because he got the wages up. He forced people to pay more and if they weren't willing to do that he would call a strike and limit the coal production. My dad talked about that a lot at the dinner table and that had an influence on me. ROH: Who was your friend that was the person who would vote for anyone but a Republican? RR: Jerry Hatch. He was my debate partner. His dad was in the state legislator as a democrat. Jerry always was a democrat. He never changed. He is still a democrat. 16 ROH: When you were in high school did you realize that you wanted to go to college at that point? RR: Yes. In fact, I wanted to be a lawyer at that time and when I wrote my name on the book just to identify it as my book I would write, "Richard Richards Esquire." AR: I've got a page out of something when he was the student of the year and he tells what he wants to do in the future. RR: When I was a senior in high school, I was chosen to give the Valedictory speech. I was not the Valedictorian, but I was chosen to give that speech at the graduation. ROH: So you ran for president and got interested in debate, how did that come about? Were you listening to the radio at that point or did you hear other people speak that influenced you? RR: We listened to the radio and read the newspaper. We always had newspapers and I even take four newspapers here now. I spend a couple hours every day reading the Wall Street Journal and the Investor's Business Daily, The Standard, and Deseret News. ROH: That's incredible. Did your dad take a lot of newspapers too at your house? RR: I don't know how many he took, but I know we took some. ROH: I was just trying to find out where the influence of the debate would have come from because you were interested in both battling physically and verbally so I find that fascinating. 17 RR: Well, I think the word "debate" means to "beat down." ROH: Did you have teachers that inspired you in high school? RR: My debate teacher was the principal out at Riverdale that banged my head. He was my coach all the way through. ROH: You were in school and you were working so give me an idea of your schedule. RR: I would go to school and after school at 3:30 p.m. I would go to my dad's shop and work for a couple of hours and go home. I always worked on Saturdays. My dad probably was the greatest influence on me of anybody because he always said, "I'm not going to give you money, but I'll give you a job. You can work for it and you can have the money." That's the way he was. ROH: So you were student of the year in your high school. RR: Well I don't know if that's what they called it, but maybe they did. ROH: Yes, we will get a copy of this. I'm looking at a photograph that says, "The typical boy graduate is Dick Richards, he's only 5'8" but he has short brown hair and warm brown eyes. He likes school this year but in the past years he skipped school every chance he got. Now he's sorry he's leaving." Is this college or high school? RR: That's high school. ROH: Do you remember what you talked about in your speech? 18 RR: I don't think I have a copy of that speech, but I have a copy of my college speech when I spoke at graduation there. ROH: You were public speaking at a young age. We're going to finish up talking about high school years and move on to college. When you graduated from high school, you wrote the commencement speech. What did you do after high school? RR: Obviously, during the summer I worked for my dad. In the Fall I enrolled at Weber Junior College. Weber Junior College at that time was on 25th Street at about Monroe and Madison. There were about four buildings there and one of them is still there— it's the Deseret Gym building. The other buildings are gone. It was a very small school. Interestingly enough, the president of that school was Dr. Henry Aldus Dickson. He knew an awful lot of the kids by name. We were all very friendly with him. He took a liking to me and I'm not sure why, but he said to me one time, "Dick, are you having a little trouble raising money to go to school?" I said, "Yeah, I'm working but I don't have the money yet." He said, "Well, you drop in my office and see the secretary and she'll give you a scholarship." So I walked in the office and they gave me a twenty-five dollar scholarship. That was a full quarter's tuition. I actually have a copy of that scholarship. ROH: That's fantastic. RR: He liked me and he wanted to help me out. I guess he knew I came from a family of a lot of kids. All of my siblings were still at home. ROH: Did your brother ahead of you go to college? 19 RR: I don't remember. I guess he went to college before me, but I didn't have a lot of relationship with my brother at that time. He was a year and a half older than me and he had different friends. We did some things together, but mostly we each had our own friends. ROH: What did you study at Weber College? RR: I studied debate, philosophy, political science, and economics. I did a lot of those subjects, I didn't do any basket weaving and that stuff. No political correctness at that time. I got enough credits in what I studied in history, philosophy and economics that I was able to transfer them to law school without having a bachelor's degree. When I applied to law school they said, "Well you haven't got a bachelor's degree, you can't come here with what you've got." I said, "Look at the catalog." The catalog said, "153 acceptable hours," or something and I had them. I said, "There they are." He said, "Well, I guess you're right." They enrolled me in law school without having a degree from Weber. ROH: Where was that? RR: University of Utah law school. ROH: How old were you when you started law school? RR: I started law school after I'd been in the army and returned, so there's a gap there. ROH: Did you go into the army after Weber? 20 RR: In August of 1952, I was drafted. The Korean War was on and we were all drafted. It was kind of interesting at that time because there was a lady by the name of Agnus Christe who was the head of the selective service office who really resented Mormon kids going on missions and not going in the army. So, the day you turned 18 you got a draft notice. You couldn't go on a mission. ROH: Did you have any other friends that you were in the army with at that time? RR: I was drafted ahead of my friends for some reason by a matter of a few months. I was drafted with one kid from Ogden by the name of Jim Pollus and we went to basic training together. I went on to leadership and OCS and he did not. He's passed away since. My friends I had here in South Ogden came to Fort Ord after several months that I had already been there so I was ahead of them in the army. ROH: Well, we just kind of skimmed over Weber College, so the next time we meet we'll talk about Weber College, the Army, and Law School. Thank you very much for sharing your young years with me and we will continue next time. This is the end of the interview on August 7, 2012. Thank you. RR: You're Welcome. ROH: Today is Monday, August 13, 2012. We are in the home of Richard Richards, who goes by Dick. I am Rebecca Ory Hernandez from Weber State University and we are going to continue his oral history. We will pick up with your university years from where we left off last week. Why don't you tell me a little bit about your time in law school? 21 RR: After I came home from the Army, I decided to go to law school. I had done some other things in the meantime, but when I found out I was going to go to law school I needed some more credit hours. I went back to Weber and picked up some more hours in political science, history, and philosophy. I was married and had two children. I had to work because I had to make a living, so I worked for my father part-time and painted signs. I worked in Ogden for my dad about 20 hours a week and went to law school. That was an hour a day going down and an hour a day going back. That didn't leave me a lot of time for studying. I really didn't study very hard in law school, but I studied all day Sunday and started at 5:00 a.m. It was a tough grind. I decided it ought to be easier if I lived in Salt Lake because I wouldn't have to commute. So, I got a job with the state liquor commission. It was a political job. Governor Clyde was the governor and I think Laurence Burton was his assistant at that time. Anyway, I got a job with the liquor commission selling liquor out on 23rd South and 13th East. They paid $1.65 an hour and that wasn't enough for me to make a living so I decided even though I'm going to live in Salt Lake I better commute to Ogden to work because I could make $2.50 an hour painting signs. I moved to Salt Lake to the student housing. It was called "Stadium Village." That's where the stadium is now. Rent was $30.00 a month so it was livable for a student. While I was in law school, I was active with the Young Republicans and I was asked to become the Young Republicans state chairman. I didn't know about that because it takes time and doesn't pay so I thought I'd 22 better check with the Dean. He said, "I think you could be of help to us so you go ahead and take that job." I took it and the interesting thing is, later on when the law school was trying to get an appropriation from the state legislature to build a new law school. Jerry Hanson and I invited his grandfather who was a leader in the state legislature to come to the law school and see what kind of shabby condition it was in. He visited the law school and said, "Boy, this is bad." Our main classroom in the law school was a row of tables about 24 inches deep and about six or eight feet long and they were covered with Masonite. They were really old-fashioned. The chairs were all separate and it was a noisy place. When they saw that they said, "Let's make an appropriation for a new law school." They usually invited the governor to come speak on "Law Day" which was the first of May. The assistant dean said, "The governor doesn't like lawyers, he won't come here." I was up to the governor's office talking to Laurence and I asked, "Would the governor like to go up to the University of Utah law school and speak on May Day?" He said, "Sure, we'd love to do that, but we haven't had an invitation." I asked, "Will you come if you get an invitation?" They said, "Yes." I drove back to the law school and went in the dean's office and said, "The governor would like to come if you'll give him and invitation. You type one up and I'll hand carry it to him." He was really pleased that we could get the governor there. The assistant dean that said the governor wouldn't come was embarrassed. ROH: Who was the governor at the time? 23 RR: George Dewey Clyde. The dean of the law school was Dean Diksra. He was a good dean. The assistant was a fellow by the name of Emory. Emory was a democrat and he didn't want the governor up there anyway. ROH: It must have been really good for the law school. RR: These were big helps in getting a new law school. Anyway, I hadn't graduated because I was seven hours short for graduation. I did it in two years. I didn't have time to go for three years. I was married with kids and didn't have time for that. I took extra credit and went through the summers. A couple of the fellows were in the same plight so we asked if we could take the Bar early with the preceding class. They agreed to let us take it. We took the Bar and I passed the Bar before I graduated. I had to go back to pick up seven more hours. Needless to say, I wasn't a very diligent student after having passed the Bar already. They changed the system after that. From then on you had to have a degree. They won't let you take the Bar until you've completed law school. We ruined that for the next-comers. ROH: Did you specialize in anything in law school? RR: No, I just graduated. I was not at the top of my class. I was in the top third of the class, but I did not strive to be number one. I didn't have time to study and do all that because I was working. In fact, working 20 hours was against the rules. They said if you go to law school you can't work 20 hours because you wouldn't be able to keep up. They tested me when they found out I was traveling to Ogden, but I did okay and that all worked out. After I got out of law school, I got a 24 job with the Clayton and Gould law firm in Ogden. Since they were both prosecutors I couldn't do any criminal work. If you can't do criminal work as a young lawyer, you're never going to do any trial work. I said, "I want to get courtroom practice so I'm going to quit." I quit and went on my own. I remember my first month I did not make one dime practicing law. The second month I made $50. It was a struggle. By the end of the year I was making pretty good money, but our total was $6,000 a year my first year. ROH: Do you remember your first case? RR: Yes. I remember my first major cases anyway. I went to the judges and said, "I want to try lawsuits. Give me your guys in jail who don't have any money and can't bail out and I'll represent them for free." Between the judges they gave me ten felons and they were spread out over about a year's time. I got eight acquittals out of the ten. Immediately, I had a lot of criminal clients. They would ask, "Who's your attorney?" They would give them my name and that generated a lot of business for me. I got tired of the criminal stuff, but it was a great experience to try the cases. The first murder case I had was a fellow that came into town on a Greyhound bus, got out of the bus station, walked across the street to the Friendly Tavern, pulled out a pistol and said, "So you're the "blankety-blank"?" He shot a guy about seven times. That was Joe Edgington. He killed him right on the spot. He didn't even know him and the guy was completely nuts. He thought he was somebody else. He casually walked across the street toward the police 25 station. Several witnesses saw him throw the gun in the bushes and keep on walking and they arrested him. L.G. Bingham and I were assigned to defend him pro bono and that was my first major criminal case. L.G. Bingham, in my opinion, was the smartest lawyer in town. He was a good thinker, but he was not a real studious guy and he didn't spend a lot of time preparing the case. Sometimes he would go into court without any defense in mind. He'd find a defense as the prosecutors put on their case. He won a lot of cases. He was very talented in doing that. He and I defended this guy and ended up pleading "not guilty" by reason of insanity. That stuck and he went to a mental institution. I haven't heard anything from him since. That was my first case. L.G. Bingham and I defended another case of a couple of fellows that murdered a man on North Ogden Divide. Maybe you read about it. They picked up a sailor from Salt Lake and took him up to Ogden. They'd been drinking and they thought he had money so they took him up to rob him. The guy resisted and they hit him. They took off all his clothes, threw him in the car and left the guy naked. He was walking down the highway naked and finally fell over the side and froze to death. They were looking through his clothes because they thought he had some money in it. They looked through his shirt and no money in his shirt and threw it out the window as they traveled down the canyon. There was no money in the pants, so they threw the pants out along with the shoes and socks. His clothes were strewn down the canyon for a half a mile and nobody really understood what it was all about. One of the boys called the police and gave himself up. They arrested the other guy a few days later. Ray defended one of 26 them and I defended the other one. They got off with a voluntary manslaughter and two years in prison. They were young guys, drinking and doing stupid stuff and ended up killing a man. I tried cases from 1961 until 1980 when I went to Washington to work full-time with Ronald Reagan. I did spend some time in the early 1960's in Washington with Laurence Burton. That was for two years. I was there at the time that John Kennedy was killed and the Senator of Texas and John F. Kennedy's Vice President, Lyndon Johnson, became the president. ROH: How did it come about that you ended up moving to Washington? RR: Laurence Burton asked me to help him on his campaign. I was one of two major campaign managers on his campaign for congress and he won. He invited me to come back to Washington. I went back there as his legislative assistant and after a year I was made his administrative assistant. Dr. Aldus Dickson, who was a good friend of mine as I indicated earlier said, "Dick, do not stay there more than two years. Laurence is going to ask you to stay, but don't do it." ROH: Why not? RR: He said, "If you do you'll get caught up as a professional staffer in Washington and you'll never develop a career of you own." The pay is good and it's an exciting thing if you're a staffer to a senator and they have big issues. I followed his advice and I came home. ROH: When did you come home? 27 RR: I came home in 1964. I was here when the election was held and Barry Goldwater was soundly defeated. I decided I wanted to run for party chairman. I'd been Young Republican chairman, so I ran for party chairman and won overwhelmingly. The reason I did is because while I was working for Laurence I traveled to all of the counties in the state when they held their county convention. Those were the guys that were going to be delegates to the state convention. When I met them on the county level and they came to the state, they at least knew who I was. I ran against a guy from Salt Lake that should have won. He had a lot of money, was a prominent business guy, and kind of a moderate fellow, but I beat him about six or seven to one. Afterward he said, "I knew you were going to beat me, but I didn't think you were going to stomp me into the ground." He was a good sport. I was the party chairman for two years. In 1966, the state of Utah turned from a Democratic state to a Republican state. People say this has always been a Republican state. However, they were heavily Democratic all over. All of the counties were controlled by Democratic county commissioners. In Weber County, prior to that time, only one Republican had been elected to county office for 50 years. That was Sherriff Mac Wade. This county was so strongly Democrat that a Republican may as well not even get on the ballot. We turned that around in 1966 and won control of the legislature, both the House and the Senate, by a vast majority. I think there were only five Democrats in the Senate when we got to it. There were only ten in the House. In fact, we elected too many. It was a bad deal to have that many Republicans and 28 so little opposition. That gradually faded out. That was one of the most exciting elections of my life because it was such a wonderful victory. I was re-elected party chairman in 1968. I had a good record and got a call from the Republican National Committee in Washington. The chairman of the Republican National Committee asked me if I'd come back and interview for a job working for the National Committee. I went back and I remember the feeling. I got out of my hotel and got that stinky, humid Washington air and I said to myself, "Dick, what in the hell are you doing here? Turn around and go home." I went to the interview with the deputy chairman and the chairman of the committee at that time, Rogers Morton. They offered me a job and I took it. I became the head of party development. After I did that for a while, I was promoted to the political director of the National Committee. I brought my family back and we lived in Maryland. We also lived in Virginia down by the Pentagon and had some nice experiences. We went to the grave site ceremony of John Kennedy when he was taken to Arlington National Cemetery. Later, at the top of the cemetery, they put a forever memorial for John Kennedy. Laurence and the other congressman from Utah, Sherm Lloyd, were there. Somehow or another we got on the parade route out to the cemetery. The soldiers and the Marines were lined up all the way and we had no way to get off. Laurence was joking and said, "Don't throw out any beer cans." We went up past the soldiers and when we got to the cemetery, the guy that was in charge told us we had to leave. We didn't want to after all that effort, so we sneaked into the press section and got kicked out of the press section too. We 29 went up the road and nobody paid attention to us there, but everybody including the Kennedys came up that road. The Carsons and the Kennedys were there. The Emperor of Ethiopia and Charles Degall came in. We were almost within touching distance of each of them. It was really kind of interesting to see that. In part of the ceremony they had the Irish Guard do a drill procedure and when they were through they marched out. As they marched out me and this kid marched in where they had been and we ended up right in front of the congressman. Laurence Burton said, "Hey Dick, look who's standing behind you." I looked behind me and there was Adlai Stevenson, who was the ambassador, and all these big-shots. We stood directly across from the grave site where the Kennedy casket was standing. The Kennedys were all on the other side. I was not even 20 feet away from Jacqueline Kennedy and her kids when all of this happened. In fact, we had a chance to walk by the casket. That was a good experience. Then, of course, Lyndon Johnson became the president and in 1964 he forced the passage of the Civil Rights Act that Kennedy could not get done. Kennedy didn't have the horsepower in the Senate to get it done. The House passed it, that wasn't a big problem, but it was the Senate that didn't want to pass it. They filibustered and did everything they could to avoid passing it. Lyndon Johnson just beat them up and on the 4th of July, they passed the Civil Rights Act. ROH: What was that like living in Washington when that happened? 30 RR: That was an exciting time. They had Martin Luther King Jr. speak at the Lincoln Memorial. There were hundreds of thousands of people there. I was at the Capitol and we talked about going down, but we figured it wasn't a good thing to do to go clear down there and get involved in that crowd. We were also there at the time the Blacks rioted on 14th street and burned a lot of the buildings. That was pretty close to the same time Martin Luther King Jr. gave his historic speech at the Lincoln Memorial. That was a big event at that time. It was an exciting time and an exciting point in history. ROH: Do you remember having conversations with your family about those events in the evenings when you were home with them? RR: My kids went with me when we saw the Kennedy ceremony. I explained that to them and when we got home and they were excited about it. They liked John Kennedy, they though he was a wonderful fellow. They got to do things that other kids don't get to do. They got to go to the White House, the Capitol building, Williamsburg and Jamestown. We went down to Jamestown and that was one of the great experiences where we saw replicas of those three little boats that brought the pilgrims here in 1607 and built the first permanent settlement in America. They gave us the history about how most of them starved to death or were killed by the Indians or by something else. There were very few survivors. That was a real eye-opener to us about early history. We got up to the Baltimore Harbor where Frances Scott Key saw the Star Spangled Banner and we saw the battlefield of the fight between the British and 31 the Americans on the Potomac River. Of course, the British captured Washington and they burned down a lot of things. They tried to burn down the White House and burned down a lot of it. They torched the various places in the Capitol and you can still see where the smoke was where they had gone with their torches. That was a great experience for my kids. They all became far more interested in American government. ROH: You've written a lot about your time in Washington in your book, so I won't repeat a lot of that, but tell me a little bit about how you felt about your career at that time. You had some significant leaps and bounds from Ogden to Washington at that point. RR: Reagan was anticipated to be a candidate for president in 1968. The convention was held in Miami Beach and Nixon, George Romney, and Rockefeller were candidates. Nixon was the clear leader. I was the state party chairman at that time. I knew the Nixon people and they knew me. They talked to me many times about helping on the Nixon campaign and I said, "Well, I'm the chairman of the party so I can't do that." We invited Ronald Reagan to come to our convention and the Nixon people were just livid after Reagan spoke. We only had about 14 national delegates at that time. This was the year we picked our delegates to go to the national convention. Nixon was clearly the favorite, although George Romney had some friends here because of his Mormon ties and ties to Utah. A guy from Cutbank, Montana who was a close associate of Reagan and a guy I knew as a party chairman said, "Dick, how would you like to have Ronald 32 Reagan be the keynote speaker at your convention, he'll do it for free." I said, "Hey, great. We want him." He came and Annette and I met him in the old Hotel Utah the night before he spoke. That was the first time we met Ronald Reagan. Annette was enamored because he was a movie star, and I was enamored because he was a politician. Anyway, he spoke the next day and he just mesmerized our delegation. Every one of them would have turned around and voted for him against Nixon if he ended up being our candidate. As we got down to Miami Beach, Nixon was nominated and Reagan withdrew his name, but George Romney stayed in and I was given the opportunity to second the nomination of George Romney for president back in Miami Beach. That was a high point for me. Nixon won of course. After he won the convention delegates, they hired me to do some ground work as a field man for Nixon in about 8 Western Rocky Mountain states. I had Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana and Arizona. I organized the ground campaign and it is interesting because the thing that attracted me to the National Party Leaders to begin with was my organizational technique for recruiting people to go door-to-door. We called it the neighbors program. I was called back to New York after Nixon was nominated to meet with John Mitchell who was in charge of the campaign. They asked me about this program that I had in mind and Mitchell liked it, but some of his aides didn't like it and they started to argue with me. Mitchell sat there and just smoked his pipe and never said a word during my presentation. When it was all done, they started asking, "How do you know this is going to work?" I said, "We've done 33 it, we know how this thing works, you don't have to worry about that." Mitchell said, "We're going to do it. I like it. Richards, we'd like you to come to work full-time for us." I said, "I can't do it because I'm the party chairman out in Utah, but I know somebody who can do that program for you." They wanted to do it in Oregon first and he was running a primary against Rockefeller. Oregon was a liberal state and Nixon's people said, "We're not even going to go there, it's just a waste of time." So they didn't go there, but they sent my friend Alan Peterson, who was the guy that I recommended to do this. Peterson was an intern to me when I was party chairman in Utah. He knew my program, so they hired him to run the program and Nixon won. Nixon had never been there and Rockefeller had been there three times. Rockefeller's slogan was, "He cared enough to come." Everybody expected Rockefeller to win, but Nixon did win. Nixon said, "That's my secret weapon. I want to do that." Peterson was hired to run this program all over the country and did a great job with it. After the Nixon campaign, the next effort I got involved with was when Ronald Reagan was running against Gerald Ford. Nixon left, Ford became the president and Ford wanted to run. These same people that brought me back to Washington all thought I would be for Ford and wanted me to be involved in his Ford campaign. They asked me to get involved and I said, "I can't do that. I'm for the other guy." They said, "You're for Ronald Reagan? You can't be against the seated president. You're a party chairman and you're against our incumbent president?" In fact, the owner of Zion's Bank in the state of Utah, Roy Simmons, 34 met me at the airport and said, "Dick, that's crazy. You're going to go for that "class B" act against the president." ROH: Why was that? Why were you so pro-Reagan? RR: I just really liked the guy. I saw something in him and I thought, "This is the guy that ought to be the president." Reagan and Ford contended against each other at the convention in 1976 and it was a very close battle. We lost it right at the last minute and we felt bad about that. Prior to the time that I went to work with him Ronald Reagan had a group called Citizens for the Republic. This was a political action committee that was not for his benefit but where he could raise money and give to conservative candidates. Paul Laxalt was Reagan's closest friend in Washington, the former governor of Nevada and the Senator at that time. He invited me to join the Citizens for the Republic. I got a letter from Ronald Reagan saying, "I understand you're willing to do this, I'd love to have you join us." I became a member of the executive committee for the Citizens for the Republic. After we lost to Ford, we held a couple of monthly meetings and the meetings were usually held in Florida or someplace a distance from me and I had to fly over there and I had to pay a hotel bill. It cost me money to do it, about a thousand bucks every time I went to one of the meetings. After I went to a couple of them I thought, "This is a big waste of time." I got up in a meeting Paul Laxalt was conducting and said, "You know the next battle we're going to have is a convention fight just like the one we just lost and I don't see us getting any better prepared than we were then. I think we're wasting time." Ronald Reagan was 35 sitting at the far end of the table and he was doodling. After I said that he stopped and said, "That's right," and he pointed the pen at me. Paul said, "Well, does anybody else have anything to say?" We said, "No." No one else was going to interfere after the president said that. He said, "Okay, Dick, I'm appointing you to form a committee to come back to the next meeting and tell us what we ought to be doing. Richard, you're the chairman of the committee." We held some meetings after that and came back to the next meeting and gave him a report on what I thought we ought to be doing. We put together a program and I presented it. Everybody at the meeting thought it was a great idea except for two people. One of them was John Sears, who later became the chairman of the Reagan campaign. The chairman was fired at the night of the New Hampshire primary. The other guy was a fellow that had been with Reagan for many years named Nofziger. They all said, "Hey, this is great we want to do it. So after the meeting was over, I headed home and Paul Laxalt remained there for a while with this guy from Cutbank, Montana and Paul said, "I like Dick's idea, but who's going to get to run it? The program entails some work." Frank said, "Well, why don't you ask Dick?" Paul said, "He's a lawyer, he doesn't have time to do this and we don't have money to pay him to get it done. That's a lot of time involved." Frank said, "Well, before you write him off, ask him." So Paul called me on the phone and asked, "Would you run this program that you proposed to us? We will pay all of your expenses and enough money to pay your overhead of your office while you're gone working for us, but we don't have the money to pay you for your time." I said, "Okay." 36 I spent several months doing that and after Reagan got nominated and he was going to do the campaign, he said, "Dick, we want you to run the Western half of the country." Dick Wirthlin was put in charge of it and Bill Casing was the chairman. Dick Wirthlin was the strategist and would say, "We want you to take everything West of the Mississippi River except Texas and build the ground organization." After we won, Reagan wanted me to be the chairman of the transition team for the Department of Interior. I headed the team where we transitioned the Department of Interior from the Democrats to the Republicans and that was an interesting experience because they were paranoid about us and we were paranoid about them. It was common courtesy for the outgoing administration to cooperate with the incoming and let them have whatever information they wanted. So, we went down to the Department of interior, I recruited a group of guys to work with me on the campaign. Paul Laxalt had a couple people he wanted to do that and we took over down at the Department of Interior. We decided what we wanted to do, what people we wanted to remove and what changes we wanted to make. During that time, there were a lot of rumors in the paper about what was going to happen to Dick Richards. You saw them in Ogden. Is he going to be Secretary of the Interior? Is he going to be chairman of the party? When we got through with the Department of Interior, I got a call from the White house and they asked, "Dick, will you be available at 5:00 p.m. to take a call from the White House?" I said, "I'll be here." At 5:00 p.m., I get a telephone call from Ronald Reagan and he said, "Hi Dick, this is Ron, you've been reading about rumors that I was going to 37 appoint you chairman of the National Committee, so I want to make those rumors a reality. Would you take that chairmanship for me?" I said, "Mr. President, I'd be glad to." That's how it happened. ROH: It was that simple. RR: That simple. That's the way Reagan was, he was straight forward and simple. Let me tell you a thing I learned. This is a little out of order, but it shows Reagan. After I was elected, I was invited to go to the meetings that took place once a month between the president and the leaders of the House and the Senate. Bob Michael was a minority leader of the House. He was from Peoria, Illinois. One time, as we walked into the meeting, President Reagan says, "Hi Bob, how are things in Peoria?" Bob says, "Shucks, Mr. President, we've got it tough. We've got 5,600 caterpillar workers unemployed. We're trying to get a contract to sell our ditch-digger to the Russians and we just can't get it done." The president said, "Well, what's the matter? Is that a piece of high-tech equipment or something?" He says, "Hell no, it's a ditch digger, anybody can make a ditch digger." The president said, "Then I don't understand." He said, "Well, we have to get permission from the Department of Commerce in order to make the sale and they haven't made a decision." The president walks over and put his hand on his shoulder and said, "Bob, they just did." That day, Bob announced to his people in Peoria that the President approved their sale and they all went back to work. That's the way Reagan did it. I would have thought that he would have said to his Chief of Staff, Jim Baker to call Secretary Mossbacker and see what's holding 38 this up. Well, he didn't need to do that, he was president he could make the decision. ROH: Today is Wednesday, September 5, 2012. We are in the home of Richard Richards continuing his oral history. This is Rebecca Ory Hernandez from Weber State University. Present are Rebecca and Richard Richards as well as Annette Richards. Why don't we pick up from when you were still in Washington D.C. and you've finished your political piece of working with the White House? Tell me what you did after that presidential term was completed. RR: After I completed my two year assignment at the Republican National Committee, I chose not to run longer because there were too many problems fighting with people that wanted to control the National Committee and all that stuff. As I left, Ronald Reagan called me down to the White House and said, "Dick, you've been a loyal lieutenant to me for a long time, but you've never really been in my administration. I would like you to come and be part of the Reagan administration. What I'd like you to do is go over to the Department of Interior and be the Under Secretary to Jim Watt. Jim is having trouble and I think you could help him out. I said, "Well, Mr. President, I've been a volunteer for you for about six years and I'm broke. I need to get out and make some money. So, I really don't think I can do that." Not only that, I was beginning to have some health problems and I knew that it would be a torture chamber to go through some kind of hearing with the Senate controlled by the Democrats. I could not imagine that the Democrats would approve someone who had just been chairman of the Republican Party to go be the Under Secretary of the Department of Interior. I 39 passed that up and I opened up a lobbying lawyer business in Washington and began representing various interests. ROH: What was the name of the company? RR: Initially, I was with a couple of other lawyers, but when I started my own company it was called, "Commerce Consultants International" (CCI). When I left the National Committee, I had a going away party sponsored by the National Committee. It was to introduce my replacement, but also it was sort of a going away party for me and Ronald Reagan came. I heard from some inside people that some of the folks at the White House said, "Don't go for Richards, you didn't go when Dick Allen left or when others left. Why go for him?" Reagan said, "Well, I like him and we'll go." So, Reagan came and he spoke and said, "Dick Richards was my friend when it took courage to be my friend." That refers to the fact that I was the only state party chairman that supported Reagan against Gerald Ford while Ford was the president. That set me apart from the others and that's why Reagan appreciated me. It took courage to do that. I opened my office and immediately got some clients. One of the first clients was Sikorsky Helicopter Company. They had been trying to sell their helicopter to Taiwan for about six years. At one time they had a deal, but when Jimmy Carter was president he killed it. I met with a representative who was a lobbyist for Sikorsky and also a General from Taiwan. He came to my office and said, 'We want to buy the Black Hawk, and if we can't get it in the next six months we're going to write it off and we're going to buy the French helicopter 40 called the Augusta. We'll give you six months to get this done." I contacted Ed Meece who was counselor to the president and told him what we wanted to do. He went to the president and the president said, "Let them have what they want." That was six years of red tape cut by the president. I became a hero to Sikorsky because they'd been trying for six years. I developed a pretty good base of aerospace clients. I represented Sikorsky and I did some work for Boeing, General Dynamics and Pratt Whitney jet engines. I did a lot of work for them over many years. It turned out to be a very good client. ROH: Were there any other major clients when you were working? RR: I had some interesting ones. I was asked to represent the Kingdom of Thailand. I was the foreign agent for Thailand here in the United States. The United States was pressing some trade violations against Thailand. They were copying some of our medications. I remember they had a fake Sudafed that they sold and they copied our movies and all kinds of stuff. They stole a lot of intellectual property. The United States was going to punish them for it. When I was representing them, I talked to the Prime Minister and saw the other people that were movers and shakers over there and I asked, "What's your deal?" They said, "We'll stop stealing in two years, but we've got to do that now because the American products like medications are too expensive for Thai people to buy so we have to copy them and sell them at a lower price. We'll stop in two years." I asked, "Why?" They said, "Because we're working on our own copyright and patent laws and when they're in place to protect us then we'll protect you, but we're not going to protect you until we're ready." I went to the White House and I talked to the 41 domestic advisor of the president who was a friend of mine, Roger Porter. I said, "They said they'll quit in two years." He started to laugh and he says, "How am I going to tell the president they're only going to steal for two years?" I said, "Well, you know, the Japanese lied to you, the Chinese lied to you, everyone else lies to you, but these guys are at least telling you the truth." They withheld the sanctions against them. I represented this fellow by the name of Chachi. He was the first elected Prime Minister and after a couple years he got on an airplane with one of his generals by the name of Suchinda. The general pulled out his pistol and said, "Okay, Mr. Prime Minister, you're out and I'm in." He took over and executed Chachi right there with the airplane. Later on, Suchinda was trying to establish himself there and a lot of students rioted and picketed and so forth. About 1,500 of them just disappeared. I guess he had them killed and removed. When the king found out what happened he told him, "You're out. You can't be the prime minister here." Suchinda walked away. The king had a great deal of moral influence, although he had no legislative or statutory right to make those decisions. That was an interesting experiment. ROH: Did you ever have to travel to Thailand? RR: I traveled to Thailand once in a while, but my area was mostly in the Far East. I did a lot of traveling. In fact, someone asked me about traveling to Hong Kong and I looked it up and found I had 22 round-trips to Hong Kong in the 10 years of my passport. I did a lot there. 42 ROH: What about in Bangkok? RR: I did a lot in Bangkok. Later on, I represented a company in California called Sunrider International. I went to Bangkok, Malaysia, Indonesia and other countries to get permission for Sunrider to sell their product there and to convince them that our method of selling was legitimate. It was multi-level marketing and that was not common in the Far East, so we had to talk them into letting us do that. ROH: What happened next in your career? RR: That went on for several years. I represented people during the George Bush administration and did some part-time volunteer work for George Herbert Walker Bush in his campaign. I did some organizing in neighborhoods and in Washington, Oregon and here in the West. In fact, I was telling Annette that while I was involved with George Bush, he invited me to fly out with him to Boeing in Seattle. They were honoring the astronauts. They had the living astronauts there and I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to who was there, I never took any pictures or anything because I was there on a political trip. I think about a half a dozen of those guys and Neil Armstrong was there. They were given an award by Boeing Company for their exploits. They had an airplane like the one George Bush flew when he crashed into the ocean and he was rescued. He was really excited about that. He was looking at that and reminiscing. I was talking to Barbara Bush while he was doing that and she was excited for him because he hadn't seen one of those airplanes for a really long time. 43 ROH: Did you do any lobbying after that? RR: I did lobbying almost up to the time that I came home to Utah. Having been the Republican National Chairman, I had excellent contacts with Republicans and the Republican presidents. After Bill Clinton got elected, most of my contacts were gone. They were now Democratic contacts, so I figured that was a good time for me to go home. ROH: What year was it that you came home? RR: I think I came home about 1993. We were looking for a place to live here. I had a nice home in Washington and the value of it increased significantly. I had a profit on that property, but the tax laws were such at that time that if I sold my house, even though I bought another house I didn't get any kind of tax break on it and the government would have taken about $70,000 from me in taxes. I said, "Well, I'm not going to do that. I'll put the money into a new house." I bought a house here in South Ogden. I bought it without Annette seeing it. I came out and I saw this house and I walked in and it was a beautiful house on 46th and Jefferson, a big gray rock house. I walked in there and the neighbor was a real estate agent for Weber County. I walked in and looked in the foyer and I didn't even go through the house, it was just so beautiful and I was impressed so I said, "I'll take it." I gave him a check that night for earnest money. I said, "One condition, my wife has a week to decide whether she wants to come here." I called Annette and she didn't want to be bothered coming out. My daughter who lived here went to see it and she said, "Oh mom, you'll love the house." We agreed and we moved 44 into the house. We lived there until I started having a pretty serious heart problem and we couldn't keep up the land. The property was too big and complicated. We had to move, so we moved here into the condominiums. ROH: Tell me a little bit about your health problems you are referring to. RR: When I was living in Virginia I went out for a bike ride with my youngest son. As I pumped up a hill I had severe chest pains and I stopped at the top and I said, "Brian, I have to stop and rest." He wanted to go on so I told him he can go on but I had to rest. When I went home Annette saw me and she said, "Dick you look terrible, you need to go to a doctor." I said, "Well, I'll do it tomorrow." I was kind of gray and having a lot of pain. I waited until the next day and went to a doctor. They examined me and said, "You've had a major blockage of your arteries, but don't worry about it because the worst that could happen to you already happened." We thought that was pretty crazy to say that, so I went to a very famous cardiologist I had contact with as a result of some of my business. He ran a heart hospital in Phoenix. They tested me and said, "You've got some blockage." They gave me an angiogram and put in a stent. The stent lasted just one day and it was clogged up again. This was just a couple of days before Christmas. I said to the surgeon, "What do you recommend?" He said, "I think you ought to get a mechanical fix." He meant a bypass. I said, "Well, I ought to do it. This is a good time for me to do that. Business is slow in Washington. So when can you do it?" He said, "I can do it 45 tomorrow." I called Annette and said, "I'm not coming home for Christmas, I'm getting open-heart surgery tomorrow." Annette had Christmas in Virginia with the family before she came to see me. I remember after the operation when I looked in the mirror; I looked like my father looked on his death bed. My voice was just like him. Annette saw me and she started crying. That was my first open-heart surgery. I got over that for a while and later on I developed another problem. In fact, I'd been in Korea and worked out in the exercise room in the hotel in Korea and I thought, "I'm doing great." By the time I got to the airport I was having trouble, so that was the sign that I needed it again. Then, I ended up having open-heart surgery again here in Ogden with Dr. Cain at the McKay-Dee Hospital. That one was kind of interesting because I went to Salt Lake to the Beehive House and I was participating in a political meeting there. The pains became more severe and more severe. I didn't think I was going to make it home it was so bad. Immediately, I saw a sign that said "Hospital Next Right" so I took the road up to the hospital on Antelope Drive and went to the emergency ward and went in and told the lady, "I need some help." She said, "You look terrible. Sit down." They got me in a wheelchair and got me some oxygen and said, "You need to see your heart doctor tomorrow." I went to see him and that's when he said, "We'll do another operation on you." So I got another open-heart surgery here. The one I got in Phoenix I got about five or six bypasses. When I was here in Ogden I got a couple more. It seemed like every two years I would have problems. 46 Later on, I had a problem again and I saw the same doctors and they said, "We won't open you up, we've opened you up twice and we're not interested in performing another open-heart, we never know what we're going to get into." I was in serious trouble and nobody would touch me. I went to the LDS hospital in Salt Lake and they didn't want to do anything and McKay-Dee didn't want to do anything. My son got on the internet and found a vascular surgeon out in Daly City, California who was doing some experimental laser surgery. We decided to try that. I went out to see them and they acknowledged that I needed some surgery, but it was experimental and the FDA would not let them perform that surgery unless I had an independent doctor look at me beforehand to say, "If he doesn't get it he'll probably die." It was one of these compassionate things. They said, "There's no insurance, so if you come out here, you'll have to bring cash with you." The vascular surgeon's secretary or nurse negotiated with the hospital and everybody involved and I had to take $15,000 out to Daly City Hospital and they performed that surgery on me. It's called TMR Transmyocardial Revascularization. They open you up and pull the ribs apart and punch holes in your heart with a laser. They move the laser right up to the heart muscle and punch a hole and blood will start coming out and they rub their finger on it and it seals it over and they move over and punch another until they punch 25 holes, sew you up and that's it. I'll tell you, it was the best operation I've ever had. The impact was dramatic. I walked out of there in a couple of days and the only thing that was wrong with me was I hurt a 47 lot on the soft tissue. Otherwise, it was like I'd never had a heart problem. That lasted me for several years and we decided I could go on a mission. Annette and I volunteered to go on a mission and we were called to the Rochester, New York mission and that included Buffalo, Rochester and Palmyra. While I was there I had the problem again and I was hospitalized. When I got home everything looked pretty good. I ended up over here at Ogden Regional and had a few more stents put in. I got to a point where I was really in trouble and my doctor said, "I tried to go in there and put in another stent, but I couldn't even get my wire in the artery. I tried four times and then I gave it up. I have to tell you, you're in pretty serious shape. I don't think you'll live on too much. I'd give you about two months unless somebody can fix this and we don't have a doctor with the ability to fix this particular problem." It was the main descending right artery. ROH: What year was this? RR: It was about 2007. The doctor said, "Let me call Mayo, Johns Hopkins and Cleveland. If anybody could do it one of them can, but I don't even know if they'll touch you." Cleveland said, "Come on back and we'll look at it and decide what to do." So we went back there and we checked in on a Monday and they did all kinds of tests on me until Friday and I met with the surgeon and he said, "Mr. Richards, you're in pretty bad shape. You've got about two months and that's about all you can live with this. The only way we could avoid that is if we could fix it. We don't even want to try. We don't open up people three times, now you want 48 us to open you up the fourth time. We don't normally do that." I said, "Well, doctor, you're the best hospital in the country to do this, you're the best doctor and I'm a tough patient. I want you to do it." He started laughing and he said, "I guess if anybody can survive it, you probably could. I won't agree to do it, but stick around for a day or so and I'll talk to some other surgeons and we'll see if we can work something out. But you have no promise from me." On Sunday, we got the telephone call from them and they said, "If you're still willing to take the risk and give appropriate releases, we'll do it on Tuesday." They called back and said, "We've got a cancellation Monday, come on in Monday morning." So I went in Monday morning and that's when they did the operation on me. It was kind of interesting though, the doctor did not want to do it. I knew he didn't want to do it, so he was looking pretty glum when they were about to do it. They did twelve open-heart surgeries a day at that hospital. He looked kind of glum and I said, "Well, doctor, let me tell you something that will make you feel better. I'm a Mormon, and we have a scripture that says all men are given a gift and you have a gift to heal people and I have the gift to be healed." He gave me the thumbs up and shoved me in the operating room and that was it. He called my doctor here and said, "You know, if it hadn't been for his attitude, we would have never touched him. He had such a good attitude. We thought he had a reasonable chance to survive." After about a year my doctor said, "Write to this guy and tell him you're still alive, I think he'll be interested in hearing it." ROH: It's been five years later. Are you doing well now? 49 RR: I'm doing pretty well. I've got some problems, but I'm doing pretty well. ROH: So does this heart issue run in your family? RR: Both of my parents had strokes, so I presume it runs in the family. I've got seven sisters and none of them have the problem. I have one brother and he's had one little problem, but hasn't had a stent put in. I've ended up with nine bypasses, four open-heart surgeries, fourteen stents, and a pacemaker and I'm just ticking along until it's time to go. ROH: Were there any prominent surgeons here in Ogden that worked with you on this? RR: Doctor Cain at McKay-Dee Hospital and my cardiologist here is Doctor Diehl at Ogden Regional. He's put in about seven of my stents. He's not a surgeon, he's a cardiologist. So, that's my medical history. ROH: Let's back up here a little bit. You moved back here from Washington. Were you involved in law practice when you moved back to Ogden? RR: I still represented Sunrider Corporation out of California. I was their general council. I really wasn't though. I had the title, but I was more of a consultant to them and did routine corporate work for them. I did a little bit of other lobbying. I did not do legal work, but I did some lobbying for people. ROH: Were you lobbying for Utah constituents or people back in Washington? RR: Mostly back in Washington. 50 ROH: Can you tell me some of the people you were working with then? RR: I was working with people in the aerospace business and I had to lobby the congress for them to put a little pressure on Taiwan to buy a bunch of Boeing aircraft. Taiwan Airlines wanted it, but they had some guys in the Taiwan government that didn't want to spend the money although they had billions on hand. Our job was to build a little bit of fire under the head of the government in Taiwan so they'd buy the airplanes from us. We had a bad balance of trade. They sold us a lot more than we sold them. To sell them eight or ten 747's was a big deal and we promoted that pretty aggressively. I didn't do a whole lot more, I really was quite retired. ROH: Did you get involved with any groups in the community? RR: I got involved with some friends and we played golf once a week. I did a little work in politics. I helped Orrin Hatch and other Republican candidates. I didn't do a lot. I didn't have the energy to do a lot and I didn't feel safe to travel. I did do some traveling to visit my son in Alabama and my daughter in New York and stuff like that, but I've been retired. However, I'm writing some papers on how I think we can improve the presidential election system in America. ROH: I know you have written a lot. RR: I've had people ask me to represent them and I've turned them down because I couldn't be reliable. If I had to go someplace tomorrow at 10:00, I'm not sure I could do it because of my health. I wake up some mornings and I just can't operate. 51 ROH: I know about you're involvement with Weber State and you've indicated that you guest lecture at the University of Utah. Why don't you tell me a little bit about that? RR: My interest was primarily with Weber State. When I left Washington after having seen the legal profession and the lobbyist I thought, "We have a real problem with ethics in this country." I wanted to do something about ethics and I talked to Ann Milner who was president of the university. I embarrassed my wife in what I said, but I said, "Ann, you ought to teach ethics on the campus. If you do that, you'll be a hero and if you don't do it you'll be a bum." She said, "You mean I'll be a bum?" I said, "Yes." We laughed about that. We talked about ethics and the development people got in touch with me. He said, "If you want to do something about it, why don't you put up some money to start a foundation?" So I did. I put up quite a bit of money for it. We started our ethics program and what we've been doing is giving scholarships out. For the last couple of years we've given scholarships and I think last year we gave about $20,000. That is, $1,000 scholarships to 20 people. ROH: Tell me a little bit about who is receiving the scholarships. RR: We put on a program in conjunction with Garff Motors, who has a program for high school students. We decided to have each of the high schools in the area participate in a contest to write the best essay on how we can improve ethics in our community. The people who wrote the best essay in 20 high schools were given a $1,000 scholarship to Weber State. We've done that for two years and I 52 presume we will continue to do it. In the meantime, I decided to write a book. I started writing my book about what I had done and so on and I've got some good help from Gene Sessions up on the campus. It took me a long time. Writing a book is not an easy project. My wife had a lot of good notes. My secretary kept a lot of good notes. I had a lot of press releases. A lot of what I put in there I got from newspapers because most everything I did was written up in the press somewhere. The book is called, "Climbing the Political Ladder One Rung at a Time" That was designed primarily to encourage young people who like politics to get involved. Also, to tell them how I was able to go from nowhere to the National Chairmanship and that they can do the same thing. As I give talks around, one of the first questions everybody asks is, "How did you ever get to become the Republican National Chairman?" The press says, "He came from Podunk Utah. Where's Ogden?" They had no idea where Ogden was. I had no family that was previously involved in politics. My family didn't have money, so how did I get to be National Chairman? ROH: Do you think that in today's environment that something like that could happen to someone? RR: It would be pretty rare because I've never heard of it happening before either. ROH: I'm sure that's what a lot of the students say is that it's really remarkable. RR: Well, what I tell them is that if they are willing to do the grubby, unglamorous work like licking the envelopes, putting on the stamps and running the errands, 53 you can work yourself up that ladder. Candidates love volunteers and if you're a good volunteer, you will just keep progressing up the line. The guy that I hired to be the executive director of the party here when I was the national chairman was Dave Turner, a young kid out of Utah State that volunteered to drive a car for me when I was a candidate. He was just a young kid interested in politics and he was a driver. From there he just moved up the ladder until he ended up in a pretty good position. ROH: What is he doing now? RR: He worked for Hudd for a while and he's just trying to get some years in for government service and he's working for the national security people at the airport. ROH: Back to this ethics business. It's curious to me because I don't know of a lot of ethics programs at other schools, so what inspired you to create something related to ethics at Weber State? RR: Well, because we needed it. We really need it. When I talked to them, Ann said, "Talk to the head of the business department." I talked to him and he said, "Well, we devote an hour or two in the course of study on ethics." I said, "That's nothing. We ought to have a whole program of ethics." I really pushed it hard and Nathan Clark pushed me to put up the money to start it and that's what we've done. Every day you can read in the newspaper about some major breech of ethics on the part of a governor, a senator, or someone that works for the city— everybody. There's ethical breech all around us and a lot of times these kids 54 don't know any better. I've seen surveys where they ask kids if they have ever cheated in school. Seventy-five percent of them say they've cheated and when you ask why they say, "Well, everybody else is cheating and I'm competing with them. If I have to compete with them then I guess I have to cheat." I thought, "We need to start teaching them a little bit earlier." If we can get a hold of these kids in high school and get them involved in ethics, it's going to a make a difference. Someone asked me, "How are you going to measure success?" I said, "I don't know that you can, but somewhere along the line you're going to touch somebody and that's going to improve their attitude on ethics." That's what it's all about. It's a difficult thing. It's prodding all the time and trying to get people to buy scholarships for the kids, but we have had some experience from these young kids that won the scholarship that say, "I could not have gone to college without that scholarship. That made all the difference in the world to me." We give it to them not because they are rich or good students, but because they have the best ideas about ethics. I still spend a lot of time and effort on this ethics stuff. ROH: I think that's great. RR: However, I do have a complaint against the university on this and I've talked to a lot of these guys that raise big chunks of money. I say, "Why don't you tell the people that are giving to earmark some of that money for ethics?" The university doesn't want to do it because they want the money to go into the building or whatever they do. There's no reason why we can't tell a guy that's going to give a million dollars that $50,000 of that can go into ethics, but the university has their 55 own program and it isn't channeling the ethics program. We're getting the new president soon and I'm going to be approaching him. Ann has been supportive, but nothing has happened other than holding those meetings. We had the former governor speak to our group a year ago and we gave out all these scholarships and there wasn't one word in the press about it. Standard Examiner never wrote one word about it. We had the pictures taken of all these kids that got scholarships and we were hoping they'd get their picture in the paper and they did not. I called Doug at the Standard and I asked if he would run a story on the ethics program. He said, "Yes. When is it?" I said, "It was last night." They did not even know what night it was and I said, "You guys at the university and the public relations department failed, you should have seen that the press was there." Again, this is the second year they didn't do it. We've decided that we've got to have a public relations guy on our board. It's their job to get the press. ROH: Is there anything nationally that you're aware of happening with ethics? RR: No. It was kind of interesting when Jon Huntsman was the governor, he came up when they named the Richard Richards Institute. Governor Huntsman and Jake Garn were there and they named it. Huntsman said, "You're the only university around here that's promoting ethics. I'm going to support you. I'm going to help you." Well, he hasn't. I sent him an email when he was over in China and said, "You said you wanted to help us I thought it meant you were going to give us some money or get other people to give some money." We hate to have to go out 56 and grub money a dollar at a time to give these scholarships. Zion's Bank has been a big supporter. They have given us $12,000 each year for two years. That was very helpful to us. The university has paid for the meals when we have the banquet and that's about all the university has done. It really hasn't caught on yet. ROH: It takes some time. How many years has it been now? RR: I've been working on it for about three or four years, but we've been giving out scholarships for the last two. Alan Hall is a big money raiser for the school. I went to Alan and said, "Alan, why don't you tell these guys that are giving money that they can earmark some for ethics." He said he would do it, but I don't think he has. However, in the next week or so that committee meets again and I'm going to go back to Alan Hall and say, "Look, give us some money." In fact, because he writes this business article and I told him, "Alan, why don't you write an article about ethics?" He wrote a paragraph about it out of probably 30 or 40 columns. We got two inches referring to ethics. We're going to have to press it. ROH: I think it would be good for you to write a column too because you've got more experience. RR: I've written some columns only they've been political columns. ROH: What do you think about ethics in politics these days? RR: Well, politics today is meaner than it has been in a long time. When Jake Garn decided he didn't want to run again and Howard Baker from Tennessee, the 57 senator from Colorado said, "It isn't fun anymore. It used to be fun, but it is just mean now. Your colleagues are mean, your constituents are mean, the press is mean and it just isn't fun." Senator Baker told me, "If I knew how good it was on the outside, I would have quit the senate a long time ago." It's just a bad environment and it is getting worse. You can go back in history and you can see even in George Washington's time they slandered one another, but we slander them day after day in the press that gets to millions of readers every day. That's why it appears so bad. ROH: How do you inspire the youth? Let's say these high school kids that you're helping to go to university. How do you inspire them to change when what they're seeing is so slanderous? RR: We've made a couple of attempts to do that. We were assigned by the governor to sit on the committee to tell how to improve elections in the state. I got the students up at Weber to write a program on it and we submitted it to the governor. We also got one on ethics and what the ethics reform ought to be. Our kids on the campus wrote a program on how to establish an ethics program in the state of Utah and the legislation didn't pay any attention to it. We gave it directly to the governor and we gave it to legislatures and we gave it to the press. Everybody saw it but the legislature pre-empted everybody and wrote their puny little ethics reform which is nothing. 58 ROH: I was wondering if that had anything to do with it. I remember hearing about ethics reform a little over a year ago, so I was wondering if that is just one of those things that will take more time. RR: Yes, it will take time beyond my time to get, but whatever we do to get it going is worth it. Like I said, if you ask, "How do you measure your success?" There are no definitive measures, but if you touch the heart and mind of a half a dozen kids, that's good. Out of our first year we had one of our students that got an ethics scholarship and they worked on our committee. They went to Washington to be an intern at the White House for Obama. Another one went to work for congressman Bishop. The kids did get involved and they're doing some stuff. I can pick out two or three kids that I know we've had an impact on and will do something in politics. As I look back, when I was party chairman in Utah, Karl Rove was one of my interns. I didn't even know him. I didn't pay attention to him at that time. Another one was this guy Dave Hanson, who runs Orrin Hatch's campaign and I had lunch with him yesterday. Another one named Alan Peterson who did a nationwide organizational program for Richard Nixon and we had some guys from Ogden participating. Alex Hurtado, he was one of my best political friends and he got involved in this national organization for Nixon. I've seen a handful of people that have become involved and have been very successful, but it's got to be more. ROH: Is there anything else you'd like to add about ethics? 59 RR: There is one thing that's happening. Isaac Goeckeritz is putting together a film on ethics to promote the ethics up here. He has interviewed Jake Garn, Richard Wirthlin, Mr. Mack, the governor, and a whole lot of people talking about ethics in their business. Bob Garff talks about the ethics of his father in the automobile business. They're talking about ethics and he's preparing it and his wife said he is coming close and maybe by Christmas he will have it done and it will go on the air at KUED. I think it will be good enough that it will open up a lot of other things. Another guy that's in that is Dan Jones and he talks about ethics in the polling business. ROH: That will be good to see. Isaac Goeckeritz, for future reference, is a local historian, film documenter, a Weber State graduate, and one of Richard's relatives. RR: We were involved with the one on the Union Station, he did the one on the hill out in Uintah, "The U," he did one on homeless vets and now he's doing one on ethics. He's also doing other stuff. KUED loves him, they say he's got a great deal of talent and they're going to keep using him. ROH: Today is September 26, 2012 and we are in the home of Dick Richards. Present are Rebecca Ory Hernandez and Dick Richards. We are going to continue your oral history. The last time we spoke we talked a lot about the Ethics Institute at Weber State, so today I would like to talk a little more about present day and what is happening in your life. What are your involvements here in Ogden and in 60 the state related to politics? I know that you have been a guest on a few T.V. shows, so why don't you tell me a little bit about that? RR: I was on two Ted Capner shows, that's the Sunday afternoon broadcast. The first one after he read my book he invited me to come and talk to him and we talked about the things that are in the book. You've seen many of them. The other discussion we had just a week or so ago was on how we can cut down the cost of presidential campaign. This year's presidential campaign will probably cost 4 billion dollars. Each one of the candidates will raise about a billion dollars for their campaign and the political parties will make another half a billion. Then, 527 committees, or so-called super-packs, will each raise about a half a billion or more and that will put us at least $4 billion for the presidential campaign. The point that people don't understand is that the Supreme Court has rules that anyone can get involved in a campaign and spend all the money they want provided they do not coordinate with the candidate. All these committees raise money and you know what their message is going to be, they don't have to say vote for Obama or vote for Romney, you can tell what they're promoting. They get involved in it and that will bring the cost to over $4 billion. My proposal was that in order to prevent this limit the time, since you can't limit the money. Reduce the time of the campaign and allow the candidates to do their exploratory effort up until about the 15th of April in the election year. By the 15th of April they have to announce whether they will or will not be a candidate. If they say they will be a candidate, from that day on they can start raising money. They'll have to go through the primaries of the various states from that time before November. 61 If you're in a state with a caucus convention like we have, you might have your first caucus about three months after the candidate announces. We'd have the county conventions and the state conventions and if you had to have a primary you'd push the campaign between the Republican and the Democrat clear back to about August of September. They can't raise or spend a billion dollars between September and November, so it will really force the whole process to slow down to eliminate cost. Romney had been running for about 6 or 8 years and Obama has been running for 3 and it's just boring, wasteful and non-productive. The conventions and the debates they have are really about nothing and they reduce themselves to just petty criticism of the other guy. If you had only a three month campaign period they'd talk about what they want to do. They'd talk about the positive aspects of their campaign. ROH: Who profits from all of this money? RR: I made that point on television. The only ones that profit are the television stations, the radio, the newspaper, the campaign managers, and the advertising firms. The public doesn't profit by it. It's the guys that make money out of the campaign. Professional fundraisers get a percentage of the money they raise, the television people get money for everything they run, the campaign managers and the public relations people get 15 percent of what they spend on television. Just imagine a $200 million campaign on television and the guy is going to make about $30 million for putting the ads on the air. That's a big deal. ROH: So the candidates don't actually make any of the money they are raising? 62 RR: No, the candidates don't get it. It's those that are in the campaign business that get the money. Nobody likes to give it, but when you've got a campaign and they keep hitting you up for money, you feel the pressure and you make contributions. Everybody but the guys that make money on the campaign would like to see it shorter. ROH: Do you think that will happen in our lifetime? RR: It could, but I don't know whether it will or not. There has been a drive in the past for regional primaries or a national primary. If we had regional primaries, that would help a lot because then the candidate would have to talk to all of the American people instead of just eight states. Where they are now they go to Illinois and they talk about automobile manufacturing because that's the big issue there. They go to Ohio and they talk about the agricultural subsidies. It really isn't a national campaign, it is a series of little local interest campaigns. That's not good for the country. ROH: Are there any other shows that you've been featured on other than the one that you just mentioned? RR: No, I've been on his show a couple of times and I speak once in a while at the Hinckley Institute. I get invited more to the University of Utah to speak than I do Weber State, but I do participate on the campuses and I've been asked to talk to civic groups in town. My health is such that I have been turning them down. I don't know whether or not I'm going to feel well enough to do it. I just say, "No, I don't do that anymore." 63 ROH: Are you doing any local speeches during this campaign? RR: I write down suggestions for the candidates to send to them and they never follow those. What happens is that when a guy gets to be the campaign manager doesn't want other people telling him what to do. They look at guys like me and say, "Oh those guys are over the hill, they don't know the campaigns are different today." They don't pay any attention to us. They're wrong. I found my way to the national chairmanship by doing a good campaign on the state and local level and then on the national level. The principles of running the program we run is the same today as it was 20, 30, or 50 years ago. The average American has nothing to do with the campaign. They don't know the candidate. They don't meet the candidates and they don't even know who they are. If you put on a program where you give them the opportunity to participate in the campaign they're flattered by it. They want to do it. What we had done over the years was recruit people. For Richard Nixon, we set up a telephone operation and called people in the various neighborhoods and said, "I'm a volunteer for Richard Nixon, we think he's uniquely qualified to be president of the United States. We're doing what we can, will you help us?" A lot of people say yes and ask what they can do. We send them brochures and ask them to go door-to-door and tell the people about Richard Nixon and give him their personal endorsement. We know it flatters people and they think their job is very important. 64 Many years ago, one guy up in Portland called up after we went through the primary and said, "I did my work in the primary, but I'm 82 years old and legally blind. I don't think I can do it in a general election. So, you better get someone to take my place." He thought that the little role he had in the neighborhood was so important that if he didn't do it, there would be a problem so we'd have to get somebody to take his place. T The campaign chairman doesn't make any money if you do this volunteer work and neither does the television or anyone else, this is a very quiet campaign. The only person that makes any money on this is the guy that rents you the building and maybe the telephone company that has telephones from it. ROH: That's interesting. Are you doing any other kinds of present day consulting? RR: No, I'm actually retired. I'm helping a couple of little businesses, but I'm basically retired. I'm one of the 47 percent that's living off of the government program called Social Security. ROH: Can you share a little bit about the businesses you're helping? RR: I've been helping a company that makes a gasoline additive that reduces the pollution of your automobile and increases your gas mileage. Interestingly enough, my role is to get government people to look at it and try it out. I have found that people that work for the government in the motor pools don't care if you save money on gasoline. It's not out of their pocket. You can give it to them and ask them to try it out, but they don't do it. We talk about the need to increase 65 mileage and reduce pollution, but the guy that's running the motor pool at the state of Utah, Salt Lake and Ogden don't care. ROH: Is it corn-based? RR: No, it's not a food-based. It's made of algae. It does not affect the corn prices or the wheat prices. I use it in my car and I get five more miles per gallon in the city and on the highway. ROH: That's fascinating. RR: It's just a little tablet you put in the gas tank. It looks like a jelly bean and when you fill your gas tank you drop it into the tank. ROH: Is it available on the market? RR: Yes, but it's only on the internet. You can't sell it at the gas stations because it cuts down their gas sales they don't want that. I've got to give my wife credit that she put up with all of the things I've done and all of the moving. I have dragged her and my kids around the country time and time again and they've never complained. I think they've had a great benefit from doing it, but at the same time a lot of people complain if they've had to pick up and move every year or two. We never lived in a house for more than 10 years until we were 13 years in that house in McLean, Virginia and that's the longest we've ever been in a house. AR: Actually, we've been here now about as long as we've been there. It wasn't easy, I'll tell you. 66 ROH: Annette, you do history, right? AR: Yes. I've been doing that. I went to a meeting in Salt Lake on this new family search and they asked how long people have been researching and I'd been researching the longest. Over 50 years. I started when I was pretty young. Our oldest daughter was three months old when I got involved. ROH: Okay. Thanks Annette. Let's talk a little about present day politics, just a couple of quick questions. Are you involved at all in present day politics as far as on the national level? RR: Once in a while a candidate will call me and ask if he can sit down with me for a while and talk about the campaign and I give him some ideas. Otherwise, I'm really not involved. I was called by the campaign chairman for Governor Rick Perry and asked if I would be the Utah chairman for Perry and I said, "We've got to get passed John Huntsman first." I couldn't work for Perry as long as John Huntsman was in the race, but if Huntsman was out I'd be glad to help Perry out. I think he was a good candidate except he can't talk and answer questions. ROH: Other than Perry, are there any other names? RR: Well, I gave a little bit of advice to Hatch's opponent, but I said, "Orrin is a good friend of mine. I can't tell you how to run against him, but I can tell you what I think the issues ought to be." I spent an hour with Dan Lillianquist and I thought he was a good candidate, but he ran a bad campaign. ROH: What makes a bad campaign? 67 RR: If the campaign doesn't connect with the public and the voters it's a bad campaign. What you've got to do is talk about a message that they want to hear about and you have to have a good point of view on it. That's what these polls are about. They're polling all the time, "How do you feel about immigration? How do you feel about this or that?" The candidate tailors their message to appeal to those people. Unfortunately, it gets to be just a pandering deal to them. I respect Jon Huntsman because he said, "I'm not going to go to Iowa because I'm against ethanol subsidies. If I got to Iowa they're just going to "boo" me and I won't make any headway there, so I'm not going to go pander to them." I respect him for taking that position. Most of the candidates will go to one place and pander to them and it's just not healthy for the country and I think it's too bad. I'm 80 years old and my health isn't good, so I deliberately took myself out of a lot of this. I did join the tea party and I'll tell you why I like it. Number one, this is middle class America, the silent majority starting to make a little bit of noise. They're not looking for something special for themselves; they just don't want things special given to everybody else. They say, "We've got to cut down our spending." It isn't a question of raising more money, it's spending less money. When they go out and they have a rally of 15,000 people, there's no paraphernalia on the ground or a mess. They don't create a problem. It's clean, it's nice and these are good American citizens voicing their opinion. I read where people say, "The tea party is fading and they are not going to be all that critical in the campaign." They're kidding themselves. The tea party is alive and well and they will be very active in the campaigns when it comes closer to election time. 68 They don't campaign all year long, but they will be out working and they will have an impact. ROH: I think it's interesting that today that we have a new party. I think most people would find that interesting historically to look back and see the beginnings of this new party. Thank you for sharing. RR: One of the things that I propose in election reform is that they allow all parties to campaign in primary elections. Let them all get into the campaign and you'll wash out those that aren't really going to be a contender and you're going to end up with two or three. Maybe there would be three candidates in November, but there's nothing wrong with that. Maybe the guy that wins the presidency only had 47 percent of the population, but that's okay. Other people ought to have the right to voice their point of view and have the American people hear it. ROH: I had a young political science student ask me a question that they wanted me to ask you. He said that a lot of his friends are just not interested in politics at all. I would say between the ages of 19 and 26 are the age of his friends right now. He wanted me to ask you why they should be interested or get involved in politics because their perception of everything they see is negative. RR: That's unfortunate. A lot of people are turned off by the negative campaigns. I am. I'd get tired of listening to them. In fact, I asked Ted Capner if he watched all of the debates and he said, "No." I said, "Neither did I." I couldn't watch them all because they were not productive. I'd tell these young kids, "If you are really interested in politics, find a candidate that you like who's telling the story the way 69 you like it and join that campaign. If you get involved in it you will see your way through all of these things. You'll see how productive it can be." When you're only 19 years old, you're not thinking about retirement, medical expenses, or high taxes. You just haven't been out in the real world yet. As soon as you get a job and get your paycheck and you find out how much money was taken out for social security and worker's compensation and all these other things you think, "Hey, I thought I was getting $200 and I got $150." That shocks them and that's the eye-opener to these people. It kind of goes along with what Winston Churchill said, "When you're 19 years old, if you're not a liberal you've got no heart, but when you're 55 years old, if you're not a conservative you've got no brains." ROH: Right. That was what he asked, "How does it impact my life? All I'm trying to do is survive." He's actually got a wife and a child. He's working, going to school and he's involved on campus in leadership. He said, "I don't see how I can even be a blip on the radar of what's going on nationally." RR: Well, that's a story I tell in my book. I started out as the junior Republican chairman at Weber Junior College in 1952. In 1980, I was the Republican National Chairman. I climbed up. President Reagan said, "He's had every job on the way up. This is the first chairman I know that's worked his way through the state and national chairmanship positions." There's opportunity out there for these guys and in order to really understand it, I think you have to get involved in a campaign. The guy who's going to school and has a wife and kids says, "I'm 70 worried about my health insurance and if we have another baby we can't afford the cost of it." Then insurance becomes interesting to him. After a while, he gets hurt on the job or he gets sick, then social security, Medicare, and disability becomes interesting to him. These things become interesting as he grows older and he's facing that proposition. Young people don't look that far ahead. They think they're invincible and indestructible. They just don't see the problems down the road. ROH: Right. So let's talk a little bit about your family. I know you've got lots of children. RR: I've got five. ROH: That's a good-sized family. Are any of them involved in politics? RR: No, that is the interesting thing. My oldest son is a professor of philosophy at the University of Alabama. His name is Richard Albert Richards. He was named after Annette's father. He started out to be a dancer professionally and he danced around the world as a ballet dancer. He was quite good, but not good enough to be a star, and if you're not a star you can't make a living doing it. He finally decided that it wasn't for him and he went back to school to study philosophy. When he went back to school, he took the college ACT test and he got in the 98th percentile and he was offered a full fellowship at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore. He got his degree there. He was a very good student and he had very good recommendations by the number one philosopher there and he went around to some of the colleges to seek employment and he ran into people that 71 said, "White men need not apply, we're going to hire a minority or a woman. So don't bother to apply." My oldest daughter, Julie Dockter, is married to a real estate salesman and they have four sons who are all doing very well. One of them is a businessman doing a lot of business with China and has made a lot of money. Another one is a medical doctor and his name is Dr. Dockter. Another one is in college studying something in physical sciences and the other one is a computer expert at Novell in Provo. My next daughter is married to a lawyer who's practicing law in New York. She's interested in politics, but she doesn't do much of it. She reads a lot and she gets involved a little bit but she has three kids and teaches early morning seminary and some other things. Her name is Jan Stevenson. My next daughter is Amy Hartvigsen and her husband is a landscape architect down in Alpine and they have four boys. The oldest is now on a mission. They have really talented kids. There is a lot of talent around my grandkids. My youngest son, Brian, works for the state of Utah in Utah Workplace. That's my family. I have ten grandchildren and eleven great grandchildren and four of those great grandchildren are part Chinese. My grandson, Chris Dockter married a Chinese girl from Taiwan. 72 ROH: I couldn't help but notice that you have a lot of art hanging in your home. RR: It's all family art. My father was the artist. ROH: Other people in your family are also artistically inclined. RR: Yes. My brother is an artist and he taught art at Dennison University in Dallas. My son, Rich, painted that big picture on the wall there. On the wall up there I've got paintings of my father, my brother, my daughter, and my son. We've all got a painting up there. My father is the best artist of the bunch. I have sisters that are very good. I think you saw the picture of the dogs in my bedroom. One of my sisters did that. There are a number of good artists in the family. The etching above the piano was by my brother. That big picture there is done by my son, Rich. The Abraham Lincoln was given to me by the Republican Party of Utah when I completed my term as state chairman. The star is a little thing that Richard Nixon gave out when he was elected president. The eagle is from the inauguration of Reagan and Bush. Geronimo is one that I just purchased. A friend of mine, Jay Taggert, former superintendent of the schools for Utah gave me the Teddy Roosevelt. ROH: Is there anything else that I might not have asked you that you would like to address? RR: I tell people jokingly that I used to be a genius, but now I'm just very bright. As a result of my heart operations, I have lost some mental acuity and I'm not as sharp as I used to be. My memory isn't as good. I have bad days so I'm limited. As a former National Chairman, I always have access to a seat at the national 73 conventions. They have one for former chairmen and I couldn't go so I asked them if my nephew could use my credentials so he went to the last convention. I went to every convention from 1968 until George W. Bush ran. I did not go then, but I went through Nixon, Reagan, and H. W. Bush. I've been to a lot of conventions. ROH: Is your nephew involved in politics now? RR: He's a lobbyist so he's a little bit involved in politics, but he likes to get involved. He has worked for candidates in the past. I don't have any children that wanted to be lawyers or wanted to be in politics. I wouldn't encourage them to be lawyers because I'm unhappy with the profession now. ROH: I was going to ask you if you encouraged them at all when they were younger to go into law or politics since they were living in Washington. RR: My girls were more enamored by living in Washington than my sons. They loved going to the White House and going to Kennedy Bunk Port and going to the parades and inaugurals and so on. They really enjoyed that. Everybody really loved being in that historical place, including me. ROH: Are there any stories about Ogden that many people might not know about or historical stories that would be just interesting to share? RR: Did you see the film that Isaac did on 25th Street? There is some historical stuff that I'm involved in on that 25th Street thing. When I went to law school, I drove from Ogden to Salt Lake and I had a couple of people that paid me to ride with 74 me. One of them was Annabelle Weakly and the other was Jane Larson. She was about 70 years old and she wanted to go back to school. She graduated from Weber College when she was 70 or 72. I got to know both of them fairly well. After I got out of law school I wanted to try lawsuits and I wanted to go to trial. If you want trial experience as a young lawyer you're not going to get it in a civil case. I went to the judges and said, "I want some trial experience so give me your criminals that don't have any money that are in jail and can't make bond." We didn't have a public defender system then. Over a period of one year they gave me 10 criminals and I tried the 10 felonies to a jury. I got 8 acquittals out of my 10 and that put me in business. I had lots of criminal business. In fact, it was too much. I ended up trying to get rid of it because I got tired of the criminals, but that's where I got my experience in the court room. I'll give you a quote from a guy if it won't sound politically incorrect, "One day I was walking along the street and this black guy came up to me and said, are you Mr. Richardson Richardson?" I said, "Well, I guess I am." He said, "Are you the man that represented Copeland Griffin?" I said, "I guess that's right." He said, "Well, let me shake your hand. You must be good. He was the biggest crook in town." Two of my defenses were for one guy and I won both of the cases and this impressed those in the black community. All my life I've been interested in politics, not for the sake of winning, but for the sake of helping the country. I've been concerned about the country. I see things that I don't think are right and I don't know whether I told you this story but when I was pretty new in the practice, we saw some misconduct and what I call 75 criminal activity on the part of elected officials in Weber County. I was instrumental in getting a grand jury called and ended up putting a sheriff in jail and some other things. These guys were doing a lot of things wrong. ROH: No, you didn't mention that? Who was the Sheriff? RR: It was LeRoy Hadley. I was representing a guy by the name of Ralph Anderson. He was a federal prisoner being housed in Ogden and waiting for his appeal in the tenth circuit. He appeared to have the run of the jail. Every time I'd go up to jail to see another client I'd see him hanging around. He wasn't in a cell, he was hanging around. One of these guys that had tattoos on his arm and had a pack of cigarettes rolled up in his shirt sleeve tried to hire me to represent him and he wanted an appeal to the tenth circuit. He was in jail for burglarizing a couple of post offices. He and his brother-in-law would drive a particularly adapted automobile up to these small post offices, break in, wheel the safe out and put it in the trunk of the car and drive up into the mountains and blow it up with dynamite and take out the money orders and postage stamps. He said, "Dick, I'll hire you. I'll give you $10,000 to represent me. I've got $60,000 stolen in postal money orders up in Pocatello. I can sell those for $20,000 and I'll give you half of it." I said, "No thanks. Not interested." Anyway, as time went on I talked to the guy and one day his wife came to me and said, "Mr. Richards, they're going to let Andy out of jail again this weekend. I'm afraid if he gets caught out of jail when he's supposed to be in jail the sheriff will say he escaped and he'll get an extra 5 or 10 years punishment." 76 When I found out they were letting him out of jail I said, "I've got to tell the judge. I am an officer of the court so I have to tell Judge Anderson, the federal judge in Salt Lake, what's happening here." I called the judge and he said, "You ought to call Judge Ritter." I said, "Judge, I don't like Judge Ritter and he doesn't like me so I'm telling you. I've now done my duty." As a result of what happened here a grand jury was called and the grand jury heard the evidence that the sheriff would let him out on weekends and he'd go burglarize someplace and share what he stole with the sheriff. The grand jury said to contact him and ask him to give some specifics about one of the burglaries that only the burglar would know. We'll find out if he's telling the truth. He said, "I knocked off the Red Pantry Café on the corner of Ogden Avenue and 25th Street. I got in by kicking in the back door with my foot and I left a shoe print on the door so I had to get rid of the shoes afterward. When I went in I got into the cigarette machines, I got into jukeboxes and I stole the stuff out of there. One thing that was very peculiar is when I got the jukebox money, there were a lot of quarters with red fingernail polish on them. I don't know what that meant, but that's what I took." They called in the man that owned the Red Pantry Café and said, "What about the money in the jukebox? Is there anything unusual about it?" he said, "Oh yeah, part of those quarters are what I call show quarters. I put red fingernail polish on the ones I put in so I get them back. When somebody saw other people put in for music they'd play music. They were show coins. I got to keep them and 77 the guy that owned the music company would take all the others." That was proof that my guy stole the money out of the jukebox. Finally, they put the sheriff on trial. When it was known that the sheriff let the guy out, his attorney said, "Sheriff, isn't it true that the reason you let him out was to take him to your home and show him what good law abiding citizens lived like and to get a little spirituality in your life?" The guy said, "No, that isn't true." The lawyer asked the question, "Well, why did you let him out?" He said, "Greed, Mr. Alsup. Greed." They convicted the sheriff and the sheriff was put in jail down in Davis County. ROH: What year was this? RR: I don't know what year it was. I went back to Washington shortly after that. The sheriff came up to me one time when I was alone and said, "Richard, you son of bitch. I'll get you for this." He threatened me, but I didn't say anything about it. He went to jail and some of the other public officials lost their jobs and it kind of cleaned up the community. The interesting part of that is that one of the guys that we had as our plaintiff in our action against the county officials was the lieutenant governor's father. He ran a janitorial supply place in Ogden on 25th Street. His name was George Bell. His son is now the Lieutenant governor. It took courage on the part of his father to act as a plaintiff in the case. It was a taxpayer's lawsuit filed against him because they were crooked. The