This is the slogan of the National Religious Campiagn Against Torture, an umbrella organization of religious groups dedicated to ending US-sponsored torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. Proclaiming that ”torture violates the basic dignity of the human person that all religions, in their highest ideals, hold dear”, the campaign encompasses Catholics, evangelicals, other Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs. The US Catholic church has endorsed this campaign, and the USCCB has even issued its own study guide, entitled “Torture is a Moral Issue,”. It’s an excellent read, and does not shirk the key moral questions. About time!
The document has four chapters. The first talks about Catholic teaching on the dignity of the human person, and how torture is a violation of that dignity. The second focuses on torture itself, why it is such a crucial moral issue, and the Church’s response to it. Third, the document examines the gospel injunction to loves ones’ enemies and how that plays out in an atmosphere of war and terrorism. And finally, the bishops ask what people can do to end torture.
The first chapter is a pretty good discussion on inherent human dignity, and how it is rooted in both the Incarnation and the fact that we are all created in the image and likeness of God. We are therefore called to build a culture of life, to promote a consistent ethic of life, to treat the other as another self. Following that, the document gives a nice overview of the Church’s teaching on torture, endorsing international humanitarian law as codified in Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Pope Benedict is quoted praising this international humanitarian law as “one of the finest and most effective expressions of the intrinsic demands of the truth of peace” and that “precisely for this reason, respect for the law must be considered binding on all peoples.” The moral prohibitions apply to everybody (this should be brought to the attention of Catholic justices Scalia and Thomas who dissented from the Hamden case determining that Common Article 3 protections applied to Al Qaeda suspects).
The document provides instances of Church pronouncement on torture. As noted in the Compendium of Social Doctrine, “the prohibition against torture cannot be contravened under any circumstances.” In the US context, the Faithful Citizenship document declares that “The use of torture must be rejected as fundamentally incompatible with the dignity of the human person and ultimately counterproductive in the effort to combat terrorism.” One cannot apply consquentialist reasoning that the ends justify the mean or the validity of torture depends on circumstances, nor can one appeal to the “hellish” nature of war of the notion that “desperate times call for desperate measures”. The document refers specifically to a development of doctrine on torture over the centuries, culminating in Veritatis Splendour, when Pope John Paul named torture– condemned explicitly by the Second Vatican Council– as an intrinsically evil act. This teaching is acknowledged when the US bishops list torture among the intrinsically evils that must weigh upon the consciences of Catholics in the voting booth this year.
They also advise against getting tied up in the kinds of pointless debates that seem to dominate the Catholic blogosphere on this topic, such as how torture is defined and whether a particular practice constitutes torture. It notes that torture takes many different guises and includes acts like sleep deprivation, stress positions, waterboarding, and hooding for long periods. As Archbishop O’Brien of Baltimore noted, “common sense usually knows torture when one sees it.” In the end, the Church’s approach to torture must always reflect the fact that Jesus was tortured and murdered, as were many of the saints throughout history.
The third chapter expounds on the need to love one’s enemies, a uniquely demanding expectation. As Cardinal Martino noted, “Christians are called to cooperate for the defense of human rights and for the abolition of the death penalty, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment… these practices are grave crimes against the human person created in the image of God and a scandal for the human family.” Pope Benedict stressed that the gospel calls us to respond to evil with good and therefore break the chain of injustice. In this way, the Beatitudes constitute a “counter-cultural truth.”
Finally, the document asks, what can we do to end torture in our world? The shocking fact is that torture is still practised in over 150 countries, including the United States. There are ten listed suggested actions:
1. Listen to the voices of torture survivors. Bring in torture survivors to speak. They list the example of Sister Dianna Ortiz, tortured and raped by Guatemalan security forces simply because she was a champion of social justice.
2. End the use of euphemisms for torture. In particular, do not refer to torture as “enhanced interrogation techniques”.
3. Educate, educate, educate—and pray!
4. Consider signing a statement of conscience; make our voices heard. Over 180,000 people have already signed the “Torture is a Moral Issue” Statement of Conscience of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture.
5. Pray for our enemies or those who consider us their enemies. “To love those who have offended us is to disarm them and to turn a battlefield into an arena of mutual support and cooperation” (Pope John Paul). Should the prayers of intercession at Mass be praying for those who consider themselves our enemy?
6. Overcome evil in the world with goodness. Insist on the just war criteria being met, and avoid “the taking of innocent human life in miltary undertakings aimed at eliminating the scourge of terrorism” (Bishop Paul Loverde).
7. Participate in interreligious dialogue; know who our enemies are NOT. Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin noted that when the enemy is difficult to define, “we have to be careful to avoid that everyone becomes a potential enemy”, to avoid regarding the combat against terror as a “war against the other”. Maybe George Weigel and his friends on the Catholic right needs to stop pumping up the evils of “jihadism”?
8. Prepare the young for a new world of dialogue. “Education for dialogue means nurturing the hope that conflict situations can be resolved through personal and collective commitment” (Cardinal Francis Arinze).
9. Fast for justice and peace; foster solidarity with torture victims. Fasting is a practice shared by Muslims and Christians, and can “assure our Muslim brothers and sisters of our love and respect, and remind ourselves that it is never right to indict a whole people for the crimes of a few.” (Cardinal Theodore McCarrick)
10. Promote justice in the world. As Pope Paul VI noted clearly, development is the new name for peace. Pope Benedict also stated that “true peace needs justice to correct the economic imbalances and political disturbances that give rise to tension an threaten every society.”
What a great document. My only regret is that it was not released four years earlier, when the torturers were running for election.
“My only regret is that it was not released four years earlier, when the torturers were running for election.”
Yes, because having a proabort like Kerry for president would have done wonders for creating a Culture of Life in this country, and for the Catholic Church in America.
And as they are not now, let’s note that Obama will legalize infanticide.
Hmm.. he would have ended torture and the incidence of abortion would be at least as bad, and maybe better. But electing the “pro-life” Bush– yeah, that worked out well, didn’t it?
Anyway, the serious point to be made is this: in 2004, nobody was talking about torture. The media did not dare mention that the US could do such things. It was always put down to rogue elements. Most Catholics had no idea about Bush’s torture regime, or chose to look the other way, Only a few of us were even focused on it (I credit Andres Sullivan and Mark Shea). It would have been nice for this to have been released 4 years ago.
“But electing the “pro-life” Bush– yeah, that worked out well, didn’t it?”
For those unborn children now alive because of restrictions on everything from funding to infanticide, things have worked out quite well. This is of 2006, and every bit of it should be applauded:
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/issues-action/other/bush-war-6069.htm
So let’s give that Bush introduced torture to America in 2001. Either with McCain and Obama it will end. With Obama we will have infanticide introduced into America in 2009.
Marriage is a moral issue also. And Obama does not support the Defense of Marriage act nor the California initiative to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Since Bush isn’t running again, address these issues and not non-issues.
MM
Actually, torture was very much an issue in 2004. The breaking of the news stories about Abu Ghraib and Taguba reports occurred six months before the election.
The problem was that a considerable number of people on Capitol Hill and in the media appear to have found reasons to accept the non-denial denials of the Administration at more or less face value. A lot was being held back that took time to reveal. By the time that work had been more or less completed last year, Bush & Cheney were in the clear politically (post 2006 election) and free to let their Potemkin village collapse.
This extended episode represents one of the darkest and deepest stains on the federal goverment in our history. All three branches connived by act or omission to either commit intrisically evil acts, justify them, excuse them or look the other way.
Hasn’t the Congress in the past couple of years changed the policiy on torture?
Get back to me when any of these initiatives eed through to the numbers, Jonathan. The whole Bushian strategy is based on rhetoric: “I am pro-life, we support democracy, we do not torture”– rhetoric that doesn’t accord with reality (technical term: lie). All I see are abortion that are no longer declining as fast as they did in the 1990s. I’m pretty certain, no matter the rhetoric, that abortion rates would have been lower under Gore or Kerry. Oh, and the US would not be a torture nation, and a million dead Iraqis might well be still alive today.
Philip
The Military Commissions Act of September 2006 was a legislative nadir in our history. It purported to remedy some things and enshrine some other executive powers, et cet.; the worst of it was the attempt to immunize the executive for the past several years (going back to Clinton’s 2d term, btw, in a bid to get bipartisan support). It’s gradually being eaten away at by the Supreme Court.
Rome’s stance on torture has not changed in the past 2 years.
Nor has international law & treaties to which we are party.
If I were Bush, Cheney et al., I would not travel abroad freely after the expiration of their terms. Like Rumsfeld, they will find themselves the objects of being served with indictments in many countries around the world.
American torture of countless millions of innocent men, women and children is the most horrid, most execrable moral issue in the world. No!!! In the entire universe!!!!
Ceterum censeo America delenda est!!!!
That being said, tomorrow is Independence Day in the USA.
Three cheers for the red, white, and blue!
So let’s give that Bush introduced torture to America in 2001. Either with McCain and Obama it will end.
Bush did not introduce torture to America. America has always tortured, encouraged other nations to torture, and taught other nations HOW to torture. This is historical fact.
Neither McCain nor Obama is likely to put an end to torture. America will always maintain that it has a right to do anything it wants in the name of self-preservation, self-interests, and the extension of its ideals abroad.
But this does not mean the Church can remain silent on the issue of torture. Thank God that the bishops are finally talking about it.
Liam,
You mean the Democratic Congress didn’t do away with torture? Perhaps we should vote in a Republican Congress?
Phillip
No, a Democratic Congress had a virtually evenly divided Senate where the Republicans stonewalled without the evil provisions the Administration wanted.
Now, some folks have felt Harry Reid has not been hard enough on the Republican minority, and accepting their record number of filibuster threats without forcing them to actually filibuster, et cet. I assume you must agree that Reid has been derelict in his duty in that regard, right?
OH, and in 2006, it was still a GOP controlled congress. The Democratic Senate has moved at a snail’s pace because of the relatively even division.
Abortion is the most important life issue, made the most important by the undeniable fact it is homocide on a scale in the tens of millions.
You get back to me when the agressive drive to expand federal funding and “protections” afforded by such monstrosities as the Freedom of Choice Act – one of Obama’s “highest legislative priorities” – means less unborn will be slaughtered in the womb.
I suppose with the sound and fury Reid has spent on other issues, if he wanted to he could of at least made sound and fury about this. And as you note, the Repubs were in control in 2006. But not 2007 or 2008.
But again, since Bush is not running this year, let’s focus on issues that are likely to be substantial this time around. Like infanticide or threats to marriage.
jonathan – You are not thinking with the mind of the Church.
Well to say the least as to Torture I think we can rest assure that we have two Presidential hopefuls that have views that take it seriously
Michael, pretentions aside, how very kind of you to serve as the arbiter and decipherer of my thoughts, opinions, and spiritual life.
And true to form, as with capital punishment and gun control, Obama is changing his tune with Iraq. It seems now his withdraw in 16 months may actually take longer:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11517.html
Actually, it looks like the only thing Obama will stick with is infanticide and gay marriage.
Though another way to look at is as that Obama is the candidate of change.
Jonathan – One’s thoughts, opinions, and spiritual life are on display in one’s words and actions.
As is obnoxious preening.
[...] didn’t Peter refuse adoration? But the Catholics do have a good stance on social concerns, like [...]
Obama has not changed his fundamental position on Iraq. Do you not understand the difference between tactics and strategy? Or do you think that sticking to everything you hold in the face of changing conditions is smart?