Journal of Moral Theology, Volume 7, Number 2
116 Pages

Journal of Moral Theology, Volume 7, Number 2


116 Pages


Catholic Peacemaking
Edited by Jason King
Military Sexual Assault as Political Violence and Challenge to Christian Ethics
Meghan J. Clark
Domestic Violence in the Domestic Church: An Argument for Greater Attention to Intimate Partner Abuse in Catholic Health Care
Lauren L. Baker
Studies in Scripture for Moral Theologians
Jeffrey L. Morrow
From Strangers to Neighbors: Toward an Ethics of Sanctuary Cities
Gary Slater
Round Table Discussion: Just Peacemaking
A "Manual" for Escaping Our Vicious Cycles
Gerald W. Schlabach
A Virtue-Based Just Peace Ethic
Eli S. McCarthy
The Changing Vision of "Just Peace" in Catholic Social Tradition
Lisa Sowle Cahill



Published by
Published 28 June 2018
Reads 0
EAN13 9781725250703
Language English
Document size 1 MB

Legal information: rental price per page €. This information is given for information only in accordance with current legislation.


Journal of Moral Theology is published semiannually, with regular issues in January and June. Our mission is to publish scholarly articles in the field of Catholic moral theology, as well as theological treatments of related topics in philosophy, economics, political philosophy, and psychology. Articles published in theJournal of Moral Theologyundergo at least two double blind peer reviews. Authors are asked to submit articles electronically to Submissions should be prepared for blind review. Microsoft Word format preferred. The editors assume that submissions are not being simultaneously considered for publication in another venue. Journal of Moral Theologyis available full text in theATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials® (RDB®), a product of the American Theological Library Association. Email:, www: ISSN 2166-2851 (print) ISSN 2166-2118 (online) Journal of Moral Theology is published by Mount St. Mary’s University, 16300 Old Emmitsburg Road, Emmitsburg, MD 21727. Copyright© 2018 individual authors and Mount St. Mary’s University. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permis sions. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401. Pickwick Publicationsand Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3,, An Imprint of Wipf Eugene, OR 97401. 13:978-1-5326-6116-7
EDITOR EMERITUS AND UNIVERSITY LIAISON David M. McCarthy,Mount St. Mary’s University EDITOR Jason King,Saint Vincent College SENIOREDITOR William J. Collinge,Mount St. Mary’s University MANAGING EDITOR Kathy Criasia,Mount St. Mary’s University
EDITORIAL BOARD Jana M. Bennett,University of DaytonMara Brecht,St. Norbert College Jim Caccamo,St. Joseph’s University Meghan Clark,St. John’s University David Cloutier,The Catholic University of AmericaChristopher Denny,St. John’s UniversityMari Rapela Heidt,Waukesha, WisconsinKelly Johnson,University of Dayton Andrew Kim,Marquette University Warren Kinghorn,Duke University Kent Lasnoski,Quincy University John Love,Mount St. Mary’s Seminary Ramon Luzarraga,Benedictine University, MesaM. Therese Lysaught,Loyola University ChicagoWilliam C. Mattison III,University of Notre Dame Christopher McMahon,Saint Vincent College Mary M. Doyle Roche,College of the Holy Cross Joel Shuman,Kings CollegeMatthew Shadle,Marymount UniversityChristopher P. Vogt,St. John’s UniversityBrian Volck,University of Cincinnati College of MedicinePaul Wadell,St. Norbert CollegeGreg Zuschlag,Oblate School of Theology
JO U R N A L O FMO R A LTH E O L O G YVO L U M E7 ,NU M B E R2 JU N E2 0 1 8 CO N T E N T SMilitary Sexual Assault as Political Violence and Challenge to Christian Ethics  Meghan J. Clark........................................................................1 Domestic Violence in the Domestic Church: An Argument for Greater Attention to Intimate Partner Abuse in Catholic Health Care  Lauren L. Baker....................18................................................... Studies in Scripture for Moral Theologians  Jeffrey L. Morrow................................................................... 36 From Strangers to Neighbors: Toward an Ethics of Sanctuary Cities  Gary Slater..............................................................................57 Round Table Discussion: Just PeacemakingA “Manual” for Escaping Our Vicious Cycles Gerald W. Schlabach.............................................................. 86  A Virtue-Based Just Peace Ethic Eli S. McCarthy....................................................................... 92  The Changing Vision of “Just Peace” in Catholic Social Tradition Lisa Sowle Cahill.................................................................. 102Contributors.................................................................................... 109
Journal of Moral Theology,Vol. 7, No. 2 (2018): 1-17 Military Sexual Assault as Political Violence and Challenge to Christian Ethics Meghan J. Clark EXUAL VIOLENCE HAS HISTORICALLY BEENacknowledged as one of the “horrors of war” and listed among the litany of ways conSquering a people, revelations of sexual violence in Bosnia, 1 women and children are terrorized by conflict. While rape has always been a central element of controlling and Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) led the United Nations (UN) to declare using rape as a weapon both a war crime and to classify it as a crime against humanity. In 2007, the UN created a coordinating UN Action against Sexual Violence in Conflict recognizing “Sexual violence in conflict needs to be treated as the war crime that it is. It can no longer be treated as an unfortunate collateral 2 damage of war.” Violence against civilian women perpetrated by government forces, rebel militias, gangs, or simply within conflict is finally receiving more attention. The recognition of rape as a war crime exposes and frames sexual violence as political violence, a violence perpetuated and permitted in support of political ideology or institutions. As theologian Nancy Pineda-Madrid notes, “Social conflict, war, and societal change have been and continue to be waged on many fronts, particularly through violent acts against women’s 3 bodies.” There is, however, another aspect of military sexual violence currently overlooked within most international debates about sexual violence and almost entirely by moral theology and Christian ethics: intra-military sexual violence, or sexual violence against one’s fellow soldiers. Using the ongoing reality of rampant military sexual trauma within the United States (U.S.) military, this article argues for 1 I would like to thank Julia Brumbaugh and John Slattery for helpful feedback on this article. I would also like to thank the participants of the December 2014 Theology, Conflict, and Peacebuilding conference in Manila, Philippines. An earlier version of this paper will appear in the conference volume published by Adamson University Press in Manila. 2 Quote from Zainab Hawa Bangura as found in “Background Information on Sexual Violence used as a Tool of War,” about/bgsexualviolence.shtml.3  Nancy Pineda-Madrid,Suffering and Salvation in Ciudad Juarez (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011), 11.
2Meghan J. Clark examining intra-military sexual trauma as political violence and an issue that should be of serious concern for Christian social ethics. I argue that significant structural change is required for the U.S. military to have sufficient internal institutional justice such that a Christian can legitimately participate using Catholic social teaching and peace-building traditions. This article proceeds in three parts. First, it presents a brief summary of the current situation regarding military sexual trauma in the U.S. It focuses on sexual violence against women; however, this is not to negate or take away from the reality of sexual assault against 4 men. It is the argument of this paper that using the hermeneutic of violence against women as structural and political violence can help us understand the marginalization and dehumanization of male sexual assault victims as well. Intra-military sexual violence (hereafter referred to as military sexual violence) emerges as an ongoing epidemic in the U.S. Second, military sexual violence as political violence offers a hermeneutic for evaluating particular military institutions as instances of structural sin or violence. Political violence here is being defined as violence that is intentionally perpetuated, supported, or permitted because of political ideology, the maintenance 5 of political order, or of political institutions. Finally, once it is acknowledged as political violence, military sexual violence exposes significant questions about the institution itself and reveals a blind spot in Christian ethics. Despite recent attention to sexual violence against civilian populations, sexual violence within the military is largely absent from Catholic discussions of the military, use of force, just war, 6 pacifism, or peace building. Drawing upon the work of Nancy Pineda-Madrid and Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, this article uses the ubiquity of military sexual assault as an existential challenge to the traditional approaches to war and violence within Catholic moral theology.
4 Incidence of sexual assault and domestic violence by U.S. military personnel against civilian populations are relevant, but outside the scope of this article. 5  In both political theology and political science, there are countless definitions of political violence – each with its own nuance and specific focus. The above is my definition, drawing on the theological work of Nancy Pineda-Madrid and Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, whose work focuses on women’s bodies as a locus for political violence. 6 For more on rape as a weapon in war, see Carol Rittner, RSM, and John K. Roth, eds.,Rape as a Weapon of War and Genocide(St. Paul: Paragon House, 2012) and Janie Leatherman,Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict(Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2011).
 Military Sexual Assault as Political Violence3ANEPIDEMIC:MILITARYSEXUALASSAULT IN THEU.S.MILITARYIn 2011, twenty-eight U.S. veterans filed a class action lawsuit against the Pentagon for the mishandling of sexual assault cases. The case was dismissed, in part, by stating the crimes in question, sexual assault, were “incidental to military service” with reference to the Feres Doctrine by government attorneys. The FeresDoctrine established that soldiers cannot sue the U.S. military for accidents and 7 damages that are incidental to one’s military service. If a soldier is wounded in combat or a military doctor makes a mistake, under the Feres Doctrine, he or she is not allowed to sue for malpractice or damages. As a result, service women and men who are sexually assaulted are stuck, as will be shown, in an inadequate and unresponsive military justice system. They are left without any access to civilian legal courts or any ability to hold the military accountable for its failure to provide justice or complicity in a culture of sexual 8 violence. A truth is unintentionally revealed by the court’s decision— sexual assault is incidental to military service for a shocking number of women and men in the U.S. military. According to Department of Defense estimates, 20 percent of women serving in the U.S. military have been victims of sexual assault. Based on the Department of Defense’s own data, it is estimated that at least twenty-six thousand service men and women experienced unwanted sexual conduct or were sexuallyin assaulted 9 2012,and only3,374 were repreorted. This presented an increase in reportingbut also a significant increase in assaults that were estimated 10 at nineteen thousand in 2010. According to the most recent data, “14,900 members (8,600 women and 6,300 men) were sexually assaulted in 2016. Rates ofpenetrative assault were unchanged from 11 2014.” Bythegovernment’s own admission, more than 80 percent of militarysexual assaultsgo unreported. Whydo so few survivors report? The answer is simple: fear. Keydata from the 2012 Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO)indicated that 47percent did not report because of fear of retribution; 43 percent heard of negative experiences and retribution
7 See Feres v. the United States (1950). 8 Ann-Marie Woods, “A ‘More Searching Judicial Inquiry’: The Justiciability of Intra-Military Sexual Assault Claims,”Boston College Law Review55, no. 4 (2014): 1329-1366. 9 Based upon raw numbers, more men are sexually assaulted, but, as a percentage of those serving, women are much more likely to be sexually assaulted than men. 10 Jennifer Steinhauer, “Sexual Assaults in Military Raise Alarm in Washington,”New York Times, May 7, 2013, 11  “Facts on United States Military Sexual Violence,”Protect our Defenders,
4Meghan J. Clark against others who did report; and 62percent of service men and women who did report indicated there wasprofessional, social, or 12 administrated retribution. It is clear that survivors’ fears are well founded. According to 2016 reports, “58% of women and 60% of men who reported sexual assault face retaliation. 77% of retaliation reports 13 alleged that retaliators were in the reporter’s chain of command.” Studies and exposés both highlight that theperpetrators were often in aposition of command or were friendlywith the commandingofficer,thusplacingan extra barrier for reporting. Accordingto 2014 SAPRO and RAND survey data, “60% of sexual harassment victims were 14 harassed bysomeone in their chain of command.” The Oscar-nominated documentaryInvisible Warinvestigated and profiled men and women survivors of military sexual assault,goingback to the Second World War. Professional retribution was a consistent realityfor victims who did come forward. For example,the filmprofiles women from Marine Barracks Washington, who, in 2006, reported apattern of sexual harassment and sexual assault in which women were ordered to attend weeklydrinkingevents and,in fact,to drink ordered (and subsequently sexually assaulted). Five female officers came forward to report sexual assault; four of them were themselves investigated orpunished,no officer was held and accountable for the assaults. Within this context and with only 238 convictions for sexual assault in 2012,it is not surprisingthat men and 15 women do not come forward. Even when someone is convicted of sexual assault, it does not mean theyremoved from militar are yservice. “One in three convicted militarysex offenders remain in the military…. Currently,the Navyis the onlybranch of the military that 16 discharges all convicted sex offenders.” The epidemic of sexual violence within the U.S. military is not a new phenomenon. As the Service Women’s Action Network highlights, for the last twenty-five years, there have been steady streams of scandals of patterned and group sexual violence in military 17 conferences, training centers, academies, and particular units. From Tailhook in 1991 and Aberdeen in 1996 to Lackland in 2013, with each military sexual assault scandal, the same drama unfolds. Public
12 “Rape, Sexual Assault, and Sexual Harassment in the Military,”Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN), 13 “Facts on United States Military Sexual Violence,”Protect our Defenders. 14 “Facts on United States Military Sexual Violence,”Protect our Defenders. 15 “Rape, Sexual Assault, and Sexual Harassment in the Military,”Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN). 16 “Rape, Sexual Assault, and Sexual Harassment in the Military,”Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN). 17 “Rape, Sexual Assault, and Sexual Harassment in the Military,”Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN).
 Military Sexual Assault as Political Violence5outcry is followed by the demand for accountability and change by public officials. At each point, military commanders and the Secretary of Defense come before Congress and emphatically proclaim there is 18 zerotolerance for sexual assault within their ranks. Similarly, they also insist that it is absolutely necessary to good order and discipline that the military chain of command alone deals with sexual assault internally. Since 2012, public pressure has been maintained through the public voice of New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and others. Minor reforms have been passed, including that victims must be given their own special victim counsel. Yet, all attempts at removing decisions about military sexual assault cases from the regular chain of command have failed. Both the U.S. military and the U.S. Congress have rejected 19 any significant change to the institutional context. In April 2016,the Associated Press exposed that “The Pentagon misled Congress with inaccurate and vague information about sexual assault cases that portrayed civilian law enforcement officials as less willing than 20 military commanders to punish sex offenders.” Here the clear intention was to protect the absolute separation of military justice and leave the chain of command’s role unquestioned. In September 2017, investigative journalists for theWashington Post detailed exactly the problem with the current unquestioned loyalty to chain of command, good order and discipline with respect to military sexual assault. Despite the fact that “the investigators compiled extensive evidence that the colonel, Ronald S. Jobo, had committed abusive sexual contact against the woman, a civilian in her 30s” and “under military law, the charge would have automatically 18  This pattern is noted throughout news coverage of military sexual assault and in every congressional hearing on the matter. For example, see “Congressional Armed Services Testimony byNavy Adm. James A. Winnefeld Jr.,” C-Span,; “June 2013 Hearings on Pending Legislation on Military Sexual Assault (3 Panels),” C-Span,; see also Lawrence Kobb, “Time for America’s Military to Face its Own Problem of Sexual Assault,”The Hill, 19 For a summary of efforts to reform the military justice system on sexual assault and harassment since 2012, see Kirstin Gillibrand, “Military Justice Improvement Act,” 20 Associated Press, “Pentagon Misled Congress on Military Sexual Assaults,” CBS News, Of particular note is that the testimony cited above of Adm. Winnefeld to Congress in 2013 arguing in favor of the chain of command has been exposed as misleading and false. See also Kirstin Gillibrand, “The Pentagon Deliberately Misled Congress on Sex Assault Cases. Do Lawmakers Care?”The Washington Post, May 26, 2016,
6Meghan J. Clark resulted in a court-martial, a proceeding open to the public,” no such 21 court marital ever occurred. Instead, a three-star general decided not to charge him with any criminal offense, against pleas from the victim. Instead of facing a public trial and possible seven years in prison, Jobo was giving non-judicial punishment and allowed to retire with a simple demotion in rank. This very brief summary simply outlines the current context of rampant and unabated sexual violence within the United States Military. MILITARYSEXUALASSAULT ASPOLITICALVIOLENCESusan Brooks Thistlethwaite notes, “Rape is a particularly intimate form of violence and for that reason more akin to torture than to being 22 killed in a war by a bomb or even a bullet.” Furthermore, she notes, “the military system cannot fix itself from the inside because the culture itself has produced this result. Rape culture in the military is a 23 product of the gender and power relations of military culture.” This paper specifically focuses on military sexual violence understood as sexual assault, repeated and threatening harassment, and patterned attacks or retribution on victims. Military sexual trauma (MST), as defined by the Department of Veterans Affairs, refers to “sexual assault or repeated, threatening sexual harassment,” including being pressured or threatened into unwanted sexual activity, unwanted sexual contact, and unwanted, threatening, violent, or offensive sexual 24 advances that occurred while serving in the military. Military sexual violence is a form of political violence, as it is permitted and perpetuated in the name of protecting both the military institution and the political ideologies operative within the dominant American military narratives. InSuffering and Salvation in Ciudad Juarez, Nancy Pineda-Madrid uses the social reality of suffering to examine the systematic, public, and brutal murders of young women in Juarez, Mexico, that 25 have persisted with impunity over the last twenty years. Using her framework of the institutional and social setting of violence against 21 Craig Whitlock, “How the Military Handles Sexual Assault Cases Behind Closed Doors,”Washington Post,September 30, 2017, investigations/how-the-military-handles-sexual-assault-cases-behind-closed-doors/ 2017/09/30/a9df0682-672a-11e7-a1d7-9a32c91c6f40_story.html?utm_term=.fea2bb5ffce1. 22 Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite,Women’s Bodies as Battlefield: Christian Theology and the Global War on Women(New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2015), 27. 23 Thistlethwaite,Women’s Bodies as Battlefield, 26. 24  U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, “Women, Trauma, and PTSD,” 25 Pineda-Madrid,Suffering and Salvation,13: “In April of 2009, theEl Paso Timesreported that since 1993 more than six hundred girls and women have been tortured, raped, and murdered, most between the ages of ten and thirty. Many more are missing.”