Disciple: Keeping the Peace
By Summerlee Walter
Individuals and congregations within the Diocese of North Carolina increasingly are engaging in direct action to bring an Episcopal voice to the public square. Whether it’s Raleigh Episcopalians participating in Moral Monday marches, Greensboro Episcopalians demonstrating for immigration and prison reforms, or Durham Episcopalians walking in the city’s annual Pride Parade, many individuals and congregations choose to express their Episcopal beliefs in part by participating in marches, demonstrations or public calls to action.
While each congregation and individual must discern where God’s call leads, public engagement by Episcopalians within our Diocese follows a long tradition of direct action by people of faith, whether during the Civil Rights movement or recent Episcopal Church actions at an immigrant detention center during this summer’s General Convention. Even if you are not called to this type of public ministry, many of the considerations and strategies of nonviolent public protest are helpful in navigating life’s difficult conversations and tense interactions.
“The work of identifying and peacefully interrupting hateful speech or actions is one expression of our commitment to reconciliation,” the Rev. Canon Rhonda Lee, diocesan regional canon, said. “Christians believe that God reconciled the world to Godself in Jesus Christ, but we also know that this world is still marked by sin. We are called to do what we can to embody love and justice, standing with those who are targeted for violence and witnessing to a better way.”
The following framework and strategies are drawn from two trainings: a May 2018 Nonviolent Action Training for Clergy put on by Ready the Ground and hosted by St. Philip’s, Durham, and a March 2019 Inciting Peace training put on by Faith in Public Life. Ready the Ground “strengthens movements for social justice in North Carolina, primarily through offering training in nonviolent direct action and marshaling.” Their framework for deciding whether or not to participate in an action is helpful even if you do not plan to engage physically. Faith in Public Life is “a national network of nearly 50,000 clergy and faith leaders united in the prophetic pursuit of justice and the common good.” Their recent training focused on how to identify, decode and rebuff speech that could move communities toward violence.
HOW DO WE DECIDE TO SHOW UP?
Ready the Ground frames it this way: When we intervene against the intimidation, oppression or threatening of a particular group, we are actually intervening on behalf of ourselves because we want to live in a world in which no one is persecuted and everyone is able to exist safely. Allies—people who are not members of a targeted group but want to help—need to find ways to be supportive but not make themselves part of the narrative. This means holding space for people from affected communities to lead and organize, and using your privilege to make sure their voices, concerns and proposed solutions are heard.
“The primary role of an ally is to use your privilege to make room for other people in a place where their voice is not always welcome,” Kahran Myers, Faith in Public Life North Carolina state manager explained.
HOW TO CHANGE MINDS
Faith in Public Life also recognizes the role words play in targeting groups for harm. While hate speech is easy to recognize, dangerous speech—speech that increases the risk that its audience will condone or participate in violence against members of another group—is far more subtle. Hate speech explicitly intends harm, and while the intent behind dangerous speech is not necessarily harmful, its impact can move communities toward violence. Dangerous speech is not limited to protests and counter-protests; it happens every day on social media and in casual interactions, so allies have plenty of opportunities to counter it.
“Speech can increase the risk of violence. It can also be one of the best tools to reduce it,” Rachel Oliver, who led the Inciting Speech training and is a sociologist who studies dangerous speech, said in her presentation.
Oliver emphasized dangerous speech generally is based in fear, and attempts to combat it should address the underlying fears of the speaker. She explained that fear exists in the most primitive parts of our limbic system to keep us safe, so we are biologically wired to overestimate threats. Speech that plays on the notion a particular group is coming to take something from your community plays on fear. So does speech that warns of danger or promises greater safety. For example, dangerous speech targeted at men often references threats to women’s purity or threats of violence against women coupled with a call to protect them. The emphasis on perceived danger allows both the speaker and the hearer to believe they are good people who don’t hate or want to harm anyone but have no other choice if they want to protect their community.
Since fear of an outside group is an underlying motivation of dangerous speech, Oliver explained an effective technique in changing minds is helping people identify not with their own group of like people —whether delineated by race, gender, religion, national origin, or sexual orientation or identity—but with their broader community. This is an especially useful technique when speaking to fellow Christians since the Bible is clear everyone is loved by God.
“It’s hard to get people to give up their identities, but can be done through helping people develop a new overarching identity that unifies them,” Oliver said.
She also recommended helping people construct a journey narrative to frame their changing beliefs. Doing so helps to avoid resistance based on shame or regret.
Myers emphasizes expecting the best in people as a framework for tough conversations.
“When people say things that are short-sighted or close-minded, and may seem malicious, it may just be ignorance to a reality that certain people face and they don’t,” she said.
IN OUR DIOCESAN LIFE
Of the five diocesan mission priorities intended to bring us closer to Becoming Beloved Community, “engaging in deeper dialogue and multi-layered conversations…with particular attention to race, political tensions between left and right, and the economic divide” is first. Without the ability to have difficult conversations in an honest and sincere way, we can make no progress toward Beloved Community.
Public witness is a form of those conversations. So are our interactions with each other, in person and on social media. As we have seen before, public witness and personal interactions can make a statement. They can make a difference. They can start or deepen a conversation that leads to change.
When violence, however, becomes a part of public witness against dangerous speech, it ends any chance of those conversations starting. Anger drowns out what needs to be heard. Emotional turmoil shuts down the open hearts and minds needed to have the conversations and recognize the actions required to bring about true change. Our work stalls.
We must remember that Jesus, too, faced those whose thoughts and actions differed from what he knew to be right. He advocated peaceful response, teaching us, “[y]ou have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:43-45)
CONSIDERATIONS FOR ENGAGING
1. What goals do you have? Why is this action the best thing you can do now to accomplish those goals?
2. Are you centering/following people most impacted? Are you there to support or take up space?
3. Do you have a group who knows and trusts each other and have worked together on this issue for at least two years? If so, what do they think about this action?
4. Can we get a critical mass of people power to create more safety?
5. Does this strategy or tactic bring in people to join us and broaden our base?
6. Does this strategy/tactic strengthen our people’s resolve?
7. Is it offensive or defensive? Which serves us best in reaching our goals?
8. What are the ramifications of this tactic? Any possible collateral damage? Are we responding to baiting? If so, what are the ramifications?
9. Does this strategy/tactic endanger our people?
10. Does this strategy/tactic strengthen our people’s resolve?
Summerlee Walter is the communications coordinator for the Diocese of North Carolina.
Tags: North Carolina Disciple
