Warrior Monk - Chapter
30
By 7:30, the two hosts and their nine
guests were seated at a long, pine table in an airy dining room. The dinnerware
was clay pottery with orange and tan swirled into the color mix.
Before the dinner began, Jennifer
said, “Pastor Grant, would you mind saying grace?”
“Let us bow our heads.” All did so
with folded hands, but for Arnie, Shane and Meri.
After a brief prayer, the waiter moved
around the table filling wineglasses with Pindar’s “Spring Splendor,” an
off-dry, light blush wine. Next came the appetizer – New Orleans style crab
cakes with a remoulade sauce.
As the final appetizer plate was
placed in front of Ted Brees, Brittney Gianelli broached the subject that most
in the room probably would have liked to avoid.
“So, Fath…, I mean, Pastor Grant, how
did you stop that wacko lady who was shooting up your church?”
“Brittney, what the hell!” said her
husband. But after several glasses of champagne, and now downing large swigs of
wine, Mrs. Gianelli did not seem to care very much about her husband’s
scolding.
Ten sets of eyes came to rest on
Stephen.
Oh,
great.
“Well, I’m not sure how comfortable
the others are.” He glanced at Jennifer, then at Joan and George Kraus.
The Krauses nodded.
Jennifer said, “It’s fine, Pastor. Not
talking about it doesn’t help.”
Grant gave a brief rundown on that
evening’s fatal events, sparing dinner guests the most bloody details. When he
finished, there was an uncomfortable silence, with the sound of forks clinking
on plates seemingly amplified.
Brittney finally said, “Crap, you must
be some shot.” Then she laughed.
With a piece of crab cake resting
precariously on her fork, Meri offered a statement with the inflection of a
question: “I read in the newspaper that you were with the CIA?”
Grant swallowed some of his delicious
appetizer. “That’s right. Before I became a pastor, I was an analyst with the
CIA.”
“Quite a career change, that,”
observed Shane Wilson.
Before Grant could reply, Meri added,
“You must be very disturbed about the most recent news regarding your former
employer?” Again, it was a statement in the form of a question.
“You’ll have to be more specific,
Meri. Which bit of news was that?” Grant knew exactly what she had on her mind.
He took a sip of the “Spring Splendor.”
Early in the week, The Washington Post had a lengthy
front-page story about the CIA using – as one agency source called it –
“aggressive interrogation tactics” in February with a terrorist leader
apprehended along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
The story offered fodder for both
sides of the debate. On the one hand, there were gruesome details as to what
exactly was done to the terrorist. He had been moved to a secret location in a
friendly Arab nation. The CIA’s tactics included waterboarding, and the removal
of two fingers. On the other hand, the
information gathered led to a terrorist cell being apprehended in Paris before
it had the chance to carry out a planned assault on the city’s transit system,
as well as the location of weapon caches in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Ted Brees said, “Meri obviously is
talking about the torture reports.” The congressman looked at Meri and
continued, “I’m sure we’re all outraged by the CIA’s actions. I know I am. Even the administration did not seem to be
too pleased with its own agency. Torture can never be justified. It makes us
just as bad as those we’re trying to stop.” He looked around the table. “Am I
right?”
“Naturally,” volunteered Kerri
Bratton.
“I should say so,” added Shane Wilson.
“Those acts were nothing less than barbarism.”
“Well,” interjected Arnie Hackling,
“then perhaps half the nation ranks as a bunch of barbarians, if you believe
the polls. In the latest survey I saw on the topic, I think it was 45 percent
approving of the CIA’s tactics, 43 percent opposed, and 12 percent basically
having no clue what’s going on. Though, just because the others had an opinion
doesn’t necessarily mean they have a clue either.”
“That does not surprise me,” said an
indignant Meri. “Since 9-11, too many people think that this nation is free to
do whatever it likes as long as it’s in the name of fighting terrorism.”
Jimmy Gianelli countered, “Damn right.
After those bastards knocked down the Twin Towers, it’s no more Mr. Nice Guy.”
Meri replied, “But, of course, those
particular bastards you refer to died when flying planes into those buildings.”
“You know what I mean. One terrorist
ain’t no different from the next. As they say, the only good terrorist is a
dead terrorist. I think a lot of people in this country have let their guard
down, and we’re gonna get popped in the mouth again if we don’t get serious,”
Jimmy declared.
Ted stepped back into the
conversation, apparently seeking to heal the growing rift at his dining room
table by finding some kind of common ground. “I think Jimmy and Meri are both
right, in their own ways.”
Jennifer appeared a bit exasperated
with her husband’s comment, “How can they both be right, Ted? They hold
opposing views.”
“First, we obviously cannot do
whatever we like in the world,” Ted said. “Second, while staying within the
rules of civilized societies, we also must confront the terrorists
aggressively.”
Grant reflected that this was not the
real difference between Meri and Jimmy, but no one looked enthused about
contradicting the Congressman, who also was their host for the evening.
The waiter and waitress cleared away
appetizer plates. Glasses were refilled. Then a poached pear salad was
presented. It was drizzled with a port wine reduction, and served on a bed of
baby arugula and crumbled Gorgonzola cheese.
The discussion about torture and the
CIA labored on, with George Kraus reporting on how vague the law actually was
on such matters. Meanwhile, Stephen simply enjoyed the food.
The entrée came. It was grilled tuna –
caught off Montauk Point, according to the servers – resting on a bed of endive
and topped with herb butter. Grant took the first bite, closed his eyes, and
chewed slowly. It was easy to overdo tuna, allowing it to become dry, but this
tuna was grilled to perfection.
It had been quite some time since his
pallet was treated this well. It would be
easy to get used to this again.
But after a few more bites, Stephen
was pulled away from his gastronomic splendor.
Joan Kraus was the guilty party. She
said, “Pastor actually held a fascinating Bible study on this topic a couple of
years ago.”
Ted Brees said, “Really? I assume the
Bible doesn’t look kindly on torture.”
Joan responded, “Of course not. Well,
not exactly.”
“Not exactly! What do you mean by
that?” asked Meri.
Joan looked to Grant for help. “Pastor
can explain better than me.”
Brees shifted his eyes to Stephen.
“OK. Pastor Grant, you certainly are a man of surprises. Are you now going to
become the first member of the clergy that I have ever heard of who defends
government torturing prisoners?”
“That would be newsworthy,” added
Meri.
This
could be fun … or maybe not.
“Well,
before diving further into this heated topic, I just want to say thank you to
Jennifer and Ted for this wonderful meal. It’s exquisite.”
Jennifer
responded, “You’re quite welcome. I’m just so pleased all of you could come.”
Grant
noted Jennifer’s genuineness, and how much of a contrast that was to her
husband. Strange how some people wind up
together.
“Yes,
you’re welcome,” added Ted. “But you’re not going to divert us from hearing
about torture and the Bible.”
“To
some, perhaps the Bible itself is a bit torturous,” said Shane with an
expectant smile that quickly faded when no one laughed.
“Yes,
well, where to begin so that this dinner party does not turn into a sermon that
bores everyone to tears?” reflected Stephen.
“I
can’t imagine that, but we’ll interrupt if it gets deadly dull,” volunteered
Ted.
“The
entire issue actually goes back to St. Augustine in the early fifth century. He
gets credit for the Just War Theory,” Stephen began.
“Can
any war really be just?” asked Kerri Bratton.
Grant
was a bit surprised by Bratton’s question, as he did not expect her to even be
listening. “That was the question many early Christians had. Could they in good
conscience serve in the military? After all, Christians are supposed to turn
the other cheek, and even pray for our enemies.”
“That’s
tough. But I remember hearing that in church. What about that?” said Jimmy.
Grant
chewed and swallowed another piece of tuna, and then took a sip of wine. Ironic. I’m getting more questions here than
during Bible study at church. He continued, “Augustine wanted to make clear
that Christians did not have to be pacifists, that as citizens they could serve
in the military. Over the centuries, Christians have used the Just War
criteria, rooted in Holy Scripture, to gauge the moral legitimacy – or
illegitimacy, as the case may be – of war.”
“Like
a checklist to determine if a war is right or wrong?” asked George Kraus.
“Well,
it’s not exactly that simple. There’s plenty of room for debate. Some have
interpreted the Bible and Augustine narrowly, and others more broadly. Just
look at the deep disagreements among Christians over the Iraq War. But in a
sense, you could look at it that way, as a checklist.”
George persisted, “So, what’s on this
checklist?”
Stephen answered, “First, the Bible
affirms the state’s right to wage war when necessary. St. Paul, for example,
warns in Romans 13 that if you do wrong, the state bears the sword. The Just
War Theory dictates that war should be in self-defense, to secure peace, to
establish justice, to protect the innocent, etc. And it should be a last
resort, with a formal declaration.”
“All that is based on the Bible?”
asked Arnie Hackling in a skeptical tone.
“Actually, yes. I can e-mail you the
exact verses, and a couple of articles that explain matters in detail, if you
like?”
“No, that’s OK. Thanks anyway.”
Congressman Brees said, “Based on what
you’ve laid out, Pastor Grant, all of us here can probably agree that the war
on terror fits as a just war.”
Grant noticed that Meri looked like
she wanted to disagree, but restrained the impulse to speak out.
Brees continued, “But that doesn’t
mean it’s okay to torture terrorists.”
“Ted, you bring us to part two. The
Just War Theory also governs how war is waged. There are two principles at work
here. First is proportionality.”
Brittney chipped in,
“Proportiona-what?” Her face was contorted in over-the-top fashion, as a child
might when completely confused by what an adult just said.
“Proportionality,” Stephen responded
gently. “War should be the lesser of two evils. It also means that the force
being used should be appropriate to deal with the evil at hand. It should be
what’s needed to establish peace and hopefully improve things, but not more
than that.”
“And the second principle?” asked Ted.
“That would be discrimination.”
Brittney again emerged ever so briefly
from what clearly had become a stupor. She said, “Oh, discrimination. That’s
not good.”
“In this case,” Stephen said,
“discrimination is good. Here it means that war should only be waged against
enemy combatants and military targets. Civilians are supposed to be protected.”
Grant paused. He could tell that other
than the Krauses and Jennifer, this was completely new ground for the rest of
the dinner party. Stephen reflected that this was particularly disappointing,
but not surprising, when it came to a member of Congress. Since he had been
doing most of the talking, Grant was the last to finish his tuna.
As plates were cleared and the servers
asked whether each diner wanted coffee or tea with dessert – and offered
various flavors of each to pick from – the conversation continued.
Shane asked, “Now, Pastor, how could
torture possibly fit into this theory?”
“Obviously, it generally doesn’t.”
“But Joan indicated that it could
based on one of your Bible studies,” Ted pointed out.
“You asked earlier, Congressman …”
Ted held up a finger and shook his
head at Stephen.
“Right, I’m sorry,” said Grant. “You
wondered before, Ted, if I was the only member of the clergy who could justify
torturing a terrorist. I don’t know if I’m the only one. But I’d go farther and
assert that in the rarest of circumstances, it actually could be a moral
imperative to, for lack of a better word, torture a terrorist.”
This generated a bit of buzz around
the table just as fresh berry Napoleons were being served. Strawberries,
blueberries, raspberries and blackberries were layered with crème anglaise, and
sprinkled with dark chocolate.
Grant knew that the banter among the
others wouldn’t last. He soon would be thrust back into the middle of the fray
to explain his seemingly outrageous declaration. Therefore, he took the first
opportunity to grab a forkful of the Napoleon. Again, it was delightful.
He managed two more mouthfuls before
Meri demanded, “Reverend Grant, please explain yourself.”
Well,
“Reverend.”
Stephen said, “Let’s delve into a
little Ethics 101. Consider the very rare cases of extracting information from
the ticking time bomb or a terrorist leader who has information about various
campaigns. The case can be made that in limited, grave circumstances where mass
murder looms, aggressive interrogation tactics – yes, some kind of torture – is
proportional in terms of being the lesser of two evils, in terms of the evil at
hand, and as the way of furthering peace.
Also, it is specifically directed against an enemy combatant. And since
it’s the job of terrorists to murder noncombatants, the purpose is to protect
civilians.”
“That’s a little too neat and tidy.
It’s rarely that simple,” said Meri.
“Indeed, I should say not,” added
Shane.
“I would agree,” said Stephen. “And
that’s why I’m talking about very unique circumstances. But there are such
circumstances. What do you do when a nuclear, chemical or biological weapon
attack is imminent, and the authorities have captured a terrorist who quite
likely has information regarding the attack, but he isn’t talking? Is some kind
of coercion, even torture, justified to get that information and save dozens,
hundreds, or perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocent lives? Wouldn’t such action be morally justified?
Some say no. In fact, many, perhaps most, Christian clergy would say no. I
disagree. In fact, I would argue that the clergy, in this specific case, offer
an answer that is reprehensible under any moral calculus, including the Just
War Theory.”
It was Jennifer’s turn to ask a
question. “I don’t necessarily disagree with you, Pastor, but how would you
respond to those who say that human life is sacred, and that by sanctioning
torture, we would be telling the world something quite different?”
Stephen replied, “Good thought. No
doubt, this is dicey stuff. And in most instances, I would agree with that
assessment. But it
also is not a moral absolute. Again, I believe there are very grim instances
when torture actually can become a moral imperative for a government. Remember,
we are still talking about the state here. And with innocent lives on the line
and the opportunity existing to extract information to stop some kind of WMD
attack, then refraining from the use of torture in that unique circumstance
would tell the world and one’s own people that human lives are not sacred.”
Other
than Brittney, who was concentrating very hard on trying to get berries from
her Napoleon onto a fork and then into her mouth, everyone else around the
table was silent.
Finally,
Joan Kraus said, “See, I told you he would do a better job explaining it than I
ever could.”
“Yes,”
said Ted. “I know I don’t agree with you, Pastor, but I’m not so clear as to
why any more.”
“I’ll
tell you why, Ted,” declared Meri. “You disagree because this is just another
case of a right wing fundamentalist using God to justify war.” She looked at
Grant barely hiding her disgust.
“I
think Pastor makes some good points,” said Jennifer. “But while I’ve
momentarily gained the floor, it looks like everyone is done with dessert. If
you like, I thought we could take our coffee, tea or drinks out on the patio,
and continue our conversation there. It looks like an ideal night, and the
breeze should keep away the bugs.”
People
broke into their expected groupings once outside. But Stephen was surprised as
Arnie Hackling sought him out. Oh crap,
not with the politicians.
“Pastor Grant, I noted what you said
about Christians disagreeing, and I wanted to get your impressions about this
letter that Pope Augustine sent out,” said Hackling.
But before Grant could say anything,
Meri broke in, “You’re asking a Lutheran pastor what he thinks about the Pope?
Lutherans have no use for popes. Why are you asking?”
Grant decided to listen.
“Is this off the record?” asked Arnie.
“Of course.”
“It’s not really a secret, or at least
it won’t be next week. I’m helping to organize opposition to the Pope’s agenda
when he arrives here in a few weeks.”
Well,
well, this could be interesting.
“Really? What are you up to?” inquired
Meri.
Thank
you, good question, Meri.
“The Faith, Trust and Freedom Foundation
is raising funds and organizing efforts so that assorted concerned groups have
the ability to be heard.”
“And which groups would those be?”
You
go, Meri.
“You’ll hear more details on Thursday,
but it’s actually wide ranging. Some are focused on the environment and social
justice. They’re worried that this could divert some Christians from their
issues. Others are disconcerted by an unwarranted incursion by religion into
politics. Many Democrats, in particular, are worried that this could worsen
their God gap at the polls. The list is pretty long.”
“Sounds like it,” replied Meri. “Who
else?”
Arnie said, “It’s interesting to see
that both liberal and very conservative churches seem less than thrilled with
the Pope’s call for ‘A Public Mission of Mere Christianity.’”
Mental
note: Tell Ron he was absolutely right.
Meri added, “What’s the plan?”
“Again, without getting into specifics
right now, extensive paid and earned media plans are being mapped out.”
Turning to Ted Brees, Meri asked, “Are
you involved at all, Congressman?”
Ted said, “This is the first I’ve
heard of Arnie’s undertakings, and I have no intention to weigh in. This is a
religious matter, and it would be inappropriate for me, as an elected official,
to be involved, other than to say that all sides obviously have the right to be
heard.” He continued, “Just between us, this is a no-win in terms of the
politics. If you engage, you’re bound to piss somebody off. It’s prudent to
just keep something like this at arm’s length.”
Ah,
profile in courage.
Grant drifted away from the group’s
conversation as it wandered to Brees’s reelection strategy, and was quite
pleased that he was not cornered to weigh in.
For the rest of the night, Grant spoke
with the Krauses and Jennifer about various people and projects at St. Mary’s,
including what could be done to heal the congregation after all that had
happened recently.
When Stephen declared his intention to
be the first to leave for the night, Meri said, “Pastor Grant, while I strongly
disagree on the torture issue, you made your case well. I know you did not want
to talk to us after the St. Mary’s shootings.”
“Don’t take it personally, Meri, I
didn’t get back to The Today Show
either.”
“Well, that’s good. But I’m wondering
if you might consider being a guest on a weekly panel show we’re kicking off
dealing with spiritual, justice and moral issues. It’s called ‘Long Island
Spirituality.’ Wayne Walters, a local radio guy, will be the host. We’re hoping
to get representatives from various faith traditions for each show. What about
it? Care to be a panelist once in a while?”
Stephen replied, “That’s not really my
thing.”
“I think you’d be ideal,” pressed
Meri. “I really do. At least think about it some more before saying no. Here’s
my card. Do you have one?”
Grant gave her a card.
“Thanks, I’ll be in touch.”
Jennifer escorted Grant to the front
door. Just before he departed, she asked, “Pastor, if you could say a prayer
for me on the way home tonight, I’d appreciate it.”
“Absolutely. Is everything okay?” Stupid question. “What happened at St.
Mary’s is not something easily put aside.”
“You’d think that was the problem. But
it’s actually something else that has me worried. It could just be my
imagination. I hope so. But I won’t bother you with it.”
“Jennifer, I’m your pastor and a
friend. You can’t bother me. Let me know how I can help.”
“Thanks. Hopefully, it’s nothing.” She
shifted demeanor, appearing to push aside doubt, making a decision and
summoning strength. “I appreciate you coming, and hope you enjoyed yourself.”
“Of course. I just hope I didn’t shock
your dinner guests with my musings on torture and terrorists.”
Jennifer smiled. “I always welcome a
lively discussion over dinner. Besides, you’re absolutely right. Nothing wrong
with holding a terrorist’s head under water in order to stop the next attack.
Anyway, good night, Pastor. See you on Sunday.”
“Good night, Jennifer.”
As he walked down the driveway, Grant
thought about Jennifer’s sudden sadness and request for prayer. As they say in ‘Star Wars,” I’ve got a bad feeling
about this.
He began praying for Jennifer Brees.
No comments:
Post a Comment