An Urgent Call for a “Consistent Ethic of Life”

Gratitude to eight Catholic Leadership organizations in the United States, including the Leadership Conference of Women Religious that on January 26, 2017 sent a two-page letter to President Trump and other senior political figures. In the letter the groups outline a “comprehensive pro-life approach”.

The group stressed six areas of concern: global conflict and violence, immigration, climate change, the provision of comprehensive health care and social services, the refugee crisis and criminal justice. The issue of abortion was, as one might expect, included in the content of the letter. It was clearly noted, however, that abortion rates always decline in social contexts in which all persons are respected and where there are adequate social safety-nets to support women and families faced with hard decisions. To truly create a “culture of life”, all issues of life must be addressed in an integrated manner.

The groups began their letter welcoming an “opportunity to promote the common good”. They continued, “As Catholics, we see the human person as created in the image of God, and value all life as sacred. This sacredness is threatened with each sister and brother left vulnerable in our society. This includes the immigrant, the refugee, the mother at risk, the unborn child, people with disabilities, and the prisoner on death row.”

In addressing their letter in this wide-ranging way, the groups were reminding the new U.S. Administration, and indeed all of us that to embrace a truly pro-life approach there must be “consistency” in thinking and action. The approach calls for a “consistent ethic of life”. Such an ethic has been a feature of Catholic reflection and teaching for many years and  it is congruent with a new awareness emerging from our understandings of science today. We cannot isolate, fragment or separate the issues of life. A “Consistent Ethic of life” philosophy holds that issues such as abortion, euthanasia, quality of life concerns, education, economy, capital punishment, the criminal drug culture, domestic and global violence, concern for most vulnerable peoples, social justice and environmental destruction must all be embraced holistically. If, with others, we are to create a culture of life in our world we must recognize the interconnectedness of all these issues. Single-issue ethics fail to embrace the complex realities of existence, the struggles and suffering of people and the environment and the call to integrity in our world today.

It is precisely this comprehensive and consistent life approach that the letter to President Trump is attempting to convey. The message is especially urgent in light of pervasive policies dividing peoples, a spreading rhetoric of fear and discrimination in many countries, global violence, the refugee crisis and the denial of environmental concerns. Appreciation to the groups who formulated the letter for keeping a vision of life before our eyes and calling us to action for life together.

Mary Rowell, CSJ

A Truth and Reconciliation Field Trip

How would you like to dance at a Pow Wow, taste Indian bread, or go into a Native American long house? That was enough to entice my 10 year old granddaughter to join me to go to the Harvest Fest Pow Wow in London Ontario at the Archeological Museum.

"Should I wear my hair in braids?" She asked. Girls and their hair! But it was a wise choice as she fit right in during the intertribal dance. Then came all the questions. Why the big drum and what are they saying? Did they really all sleep in one room? Her eyes travelled from young and old to admire their native dress loading her smartphone with pictures to share back home.

For myself, I was touched by the speaker who introduced an elder grandmother to start with a prayer and reminding everyone that women held places of honour in their culture. She began by asking the Great Spirit for forgiveness for not speaking in her native language, because as a child she had been raised in a residential school and only remembers English. There was a drumming workshop using a short chant that focused on emotions and releasing negative ones. So similar to Richard Rohr's Welcoming Prayer. The Spirit moves where she wills.

From reading about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Senator Murray Sinclair as chairman pointed out that negative thinking about Aboriginal people came about through the educational system and needs to be reversed through positive education. "Collective efforts from all peoples are necessary to revitalize the relationships between Aboriginal peoples and Canadian society. Reconciliation is the goal"

"Reconciliation is about forging and maintaining respectful relationships. There are no shortcuts." The injustice lasted for generations and will take generations to reverse. One field trip at a time. "Can we go to another Pow Wow grandma? Next time not so far away." (It was a 2 hour car drive from Windsor). 

Helen Bonyai CSJ Associate

A More Humane Approach . . .

“The Better Angels” editorial by Jonathan Kay in the September 2016 edition of The Walrus” contrasts the Conservative’s policy and treatment of offenders to the Liberal Government’s more realistic philosophy which is more attuned to the purpose of our Canadian Justice and Corrections systems. Jonathan Kay makes particular reference to a particular group of criminals, sexual offenders, who are often despised, difficult to rehabilitate, and faced with numerous obstacles in their effort to become integrated and accepted members of society. In 1994 a Mennonite group developed a low-cost program, staffed mainly by volunteers, which proved to be very successful in achieving that goal. This “Circles of Support and Accountability” program (CoSA), was lauded and adopted internationally. Despite the program’s achievement of reducing recidivism by 70%, the Harper Government cut most of the program’s funding in 2015. Hopefully CoSA and other effective and humane programs, such as the prison farms, will be restored by a more enlightened approach. (into by Pat McKeon, CSJ)

The Better Angels by Jonathan Kay

What government wouldn’t spend $53,000 to prevent a sex crime?

“Tough on crime” was at the centre of the Conservative platform throughout Stephen Harper’s tenure as prime minister. The Tories capped incarceration credit for pre-sentence custody, limited parole eligibility, opposed the modernization of obsolete marijuana laws, and legislated mandatory minimum sentences that overrode judicial discretion. As Ontario Judge Melvyn Green wrote in a scathing assessment of Harper’s criminal-justice legacy, “a policy of punishment, incapacitation and stigmatization has replaced one premised on the prospect of rehabilitation, restoration and reform.”

Harper’s attitude toward criminals was so callous that even many Tory diehards began to push back. “The federal government has a simple approach to criminal justice: more people spending more time in jail,” lamented conservative National Post columnist Raymond J. de Souza following the federal government’s decision to shut down its prison-farm program. “When queried on the evidence for such measures or a broader philosophy of the role of incarceration in the criminal justice system,” he continued, “the justice department offers little more than slogans.”

Thankfully, Justin Trudeau’s Liberals have pledged to follow an “evidence-based” approach to policy-making—which could lead to the reopening of two Kingston-area prison farms. Shortly after winning power in 2015, the PM instructed justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould to review the entire Harper-led criminal-justice reform agenda, with a view to “increasing the safety of our communities, getting value for money, addressing gaps and ensuring that current provisions are aligned with the objectives of the criminal justice system.”

One hopes this review will extend to the rehabilitation of high-risk sex offenders. When pedophiles and rapists are released from prison after serving a full sentence, they typically are treated as pariahs by fearful local residents (who often are riled up by local front-page tabloid headlines about threats posed by “pervs” and such). One of the few programs these men can turn to for help is Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA), a Mennonite-founded network of volunteers formed in 1994.

CoSA volunteers help these men deal with landlords, stay sober, access food banks, obtain government ID, avoid triggers that may cause them to reoffend, and cope with their guilt, shame, loneliness, and anger toward others (many sex criminals were themselves abused at an early age). When necessary, CoSA’s lay counsellors bring in psychologists, parole officers, or social workers to assist in rehabilitation efforts. The overall goal is to ensure that these men are not abandoned to their inner demons.

Studies suggest that CoSA interventions can reduce sexual recidivism by as much as 70 percent—which explains why the Canadian CoSA model has been adopted in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and nations throughout Europe. And yet, in 2015, months before leaving office, the Tories cut most of CoSA’s funding—with the result that the group was forced to scale back or close down many of its operations.

The issue of how to stop predatory sexual behaviour is never far from the front pages. Yet this discussion too rarely includes any examination of the way we treat assailants after they have been caught, convicted, imprisoned, and released. Charlie Taylor and Wray Budreo are two infamous child molesters whom CoSA volunteers assisted in the 1990s. Taylor (who was mentally disabled) died in 2005. Budreo died in 2007. Both men endured the stigma of their horrific crimes until the grave. But neither man is known to have reoffended following his release from prison.

If our government is interested in “getting value for money,” it’s hard to beat CoSA. Because the army of CoSA volunteers that helps ex-cons is managed by only a tiny staff of paid coordinators, costs are minimal: between 2008 and 2014, total expenditures on CoSA operations coast to coast averaged only $2.1 million a year.

Last year, scholars Jill Anne Chouinard and Christine Riddick published a comprehensive evaluation of CoSA funded by Public Safety Canada and the Church Council on Justice and Corrections. In their analysis of CoSA’s value to society, they found that the cost of preventing a single “recidivistic event” (i.e., an act of abuse) within a five-year window is about $53,000.

Given all we know about the physical and psychic harm caused by abuse, does that seem like a large sum to spend on preventing a Canadian from being victimized by a released criminal? Surely, it’s one of the great bargains to be had. I’m guessing both Trudeau and Wilson-Raybould would readily agree.

Reprinted with persmission.

Poverty Inc.

The subtitle for POVERTY, INC. says it all: “Fighting poverty is big business. But who profits the most?” This film draws attention to the many ways in which those of us in developed countries are getting rich at the very expense of the people we want to assist.

Some of us have the opportunity to feel good because we give our old hand me downs we don’t want to others who we pretend will not have them except for our generosity. Some of us can feel good about buying new shoes because at least we know a free pair will be donated to others in need. Some of us are actually able to gain monetary wealth because of our business savvy that “seems” to be doing good. As I watched the movie I found myself wondering how many textile companies have been put out of business by people donating clothes to developing countries. Why buy what you can get for free. How many local economies have come to a standstill because we import all kinds of manufactured goods from our Western cultures that could come from the local community?

Many of the people interviewed from many different countries repeated that it was good to give when people are in need but if donations are still needed five years later there is a problem.

The most striking aspect of the film was the way in which I was confronted by my own prejudices and misconceptions about life in the developing countries. As someone who has been actively engaged in a variety of social justice activities and organizations for a number of years I wasn’t expecting any great surprises. I was wrong. I am embarrassed to admit that I was startled by images of lush foliage as we listened to the words “where nothing ever grows” from the song (Feed the World) Do They Know It’s Christmas Time. Equally surprising were the images of solar street lights being developed in Haiti and computer businesses located in cities in Africa.

Throughout the movie it became absolutely apparent that those in the developing world need to participate in the global economy that they are currently being excluded from because of “paternalism”, the developed countries imposing what we think their needs are upon them. The message is clear – this doesn’t work. It is our responsibility to allow developing countries to develop. We must recognize that these countries can, and in fact need to become active participants in the global economic community to truly raise themselves out of the cycle of poverty.

But don’t take my word for it. I would encourage you to watch the film for yourself and make your own decisions about supporting our sisters and brothers in developing countries. The conversation needs to continue.

Guest Blogger
Annette Donovan-Panchaud
CSJ Associate
Campus Minister, King’s University College, London, ON

Sponsoring Refugees, One Cmmittee's Experience

The Sisters of St. Joseph in Canada have been deeply involved in welcoming refugees/newcomers to our home from the beginning of our time in Hamilton even before Hamilton was a diocese.

This is a 21^st Century story of a committee’s experience. In 2014 the Sisters in Hamilton registered with the United Nations Resettlement Program to welcome a refugee family.

Our first guest, a young woman from Eritrea, arrived 11 months ago after many lengthy twists and turns. Arafat travelled alone with no connection to Canada. I can’t imagine her anxiety during the time she adjusted to a totally strange culture: food, climate, living conditions, language, currency, transportation, clothing etc.  Today she is a beautiful, confident woman speaking the language fairly well and preparing for her first job.

It wasn’t always that way. Arafat is Muslim, and initially was guarded with us, trying not to show how frightened she was. It first openly surfaced when she moved into an apartment on the 17^th floor. The elevator ride was frightening because of who might be on the elevator with her. She had an extra lock put on her apartment door, and kept to herself even when other Muslim women tried to reach out to her. She only reveals her tortuous journey to Canada a little at a time.

Our committee was enthusiastic and willing, however, many were not comfortable because they couldn’t communicate with Arafat and shied away initially from one on one contact. Gradually there was a change when a retired teacher reached out to Arafat after ESL classes to tutor her, and a strong bond of friendship and trust developed.

We all learned from watching their mutual friendship grow.

Our second family arrived March 30. Mom was born in Myanmar – Burma - and the sons in Thailand. They are Buddhists. The family learned some English in the school camp so communication was much easier. Committee members were more self-confident. We divided the tasks according to interest and skills. Everyone assumed responsibility enthusiastically for a specific area: driving, health, education, banking and currency education, budgeting, clothing, furniture, public transportation, recreation. The gratitude of our families is both humbling, and heartwarming and cemented bonds of friendships for the future.

Lessons learned? Yes. Don’t assume the family will arrive on time, that plans will go smoothly, or that bed bugs will not be part of the arrival party. Just the same the second time round is less stressful more fun and gives us the incentive to go for a third family sometime in the future.  

Ann Marshall CSJ