There was a third (or fourth, if you count the one at Mar-a-Lago) assassination attempt on the life of our president last month. These attempts are occurring with disturbing regularity, and the time is long overdue for our religious leaders to speak out. In such moments, it is not unreasonable to expect those entrusted with our spiritual well-being to offer clear moral teaching and guidance. Instead, there is silence. 

What follows then, are my own reflections on this matter. In one sense, I am glad of their silence. If they had anything to say, I suspect it would along the lines of “a call to end gun violence.” If only we could rid our nation of guns, they would say, then these events would never occur. Having lived in a country without guns, I see the logic, although people find that other weapons, such as knives, are also useful for killing. Banning guns would reduce the number of deaths, to be sure. However, it sidesteps the main problem. Blaming guns for killing is like blaming cars for crashing. 

I suspect there are many people who would like to kill the leader of our country, for the simple reason that they don’t like him or the government’s policies. If that happened every time, no one would want to be president and we would all be living in a state of impoverished anarchy. The social contract - established through laws and shared moral norms - is designed to prevent this kind of behavior, and enables society to function in such a way that we enjoy freedoms denied to most of the world’s populations. 

When you break the social contract, as would be assassin Cole Thomas Allen did by trying to kill the entire top level of our current administration, you are denying the validity of our current political system. What caused him to think that this would be a good idea? He has provided an explanation in his “manifesto”, which he posted online before committing his failed assassination attempt.

What strikes me about this “manifesto” is how considerate he is to the feelings of others. He apologizes profusely to his parents, colleagues, students, even to the hotel workers that he put in danger. He conducts a bizarre cross-examination of himself, in which he plays both prosecutor and defense attorney, about whether to go ahead with his plan. It reveals this crucial self-justifying detail, “In so far as representatives and judges do not follow the law, no one is required to yield them anything so unlawfully ordered.” 

He concludes with profuse thanks to his parents, church, friends, colleagues, students - this part reads like a speech given at someone’s retirement farewell. His final words are these: “I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done. Can’t really recommend it! Stay in school, kids.”

Do you feel any sympathy for him? You shouldn’t. He was potentially a stone cold killer who wanted to end the lives of Administration officials “from highest-ranking to lowest.” Sadly, the “rage” he experienced overwhelmed every other good intention in his body. Where did this rage come from? Some commentators attribute it to the pernicious effects of “social media bubbles” where people express their dissatisfaction using the most violent language imaginable. It only takes one person to take this hatred to the next level.

It seems that below the calm surface of many people there is a simmering rage, only waiting for an object onto which to project. This is, I believe, a problem which runs deeper than simply holding different political opinions. The intensity of this “rage” points to a more profound psychological disorder - even a theological one.

I once attended a church service where, during the sermon, the rector told us to be “nice” to each other. He was a sweet man and his words were sincere and well meant. However, it was the kind of message I describe as “mental baby food,” because you couldn’t disagree with it but at the same time it kept you on the surface of understanding, rather than offering something more substantial. 

From his manifesto, Allen comes across as incredibly “nice” and thoughtful. Yet he was so enraged he tried to murder people. It can’t be that he was unintelligent - he wasn’t, although a college education doesn’t confer wisdom. I wonder at his Christian education: was his understanding of the gospel reduced to superficial niceties? Did he think being a Christian meant being “nice” to others? True Christian behavior springs from a close attachment to God in Jesus Christ, not from a pressure to conform to a pre-conceived mode of Christian “behavior.” 

Political murder is certainly incompatible with Christianity. Those who secretly admire Allen are not worthy to claim the name of Christ. In his manifesto Allen gave credit to his Christian background. It is important, therefore, that our Christian leaders clearly and unequivocally repudiate any connection between Christianity and the killing of one’s political opponents. Their voices especially need to be heard by the 50% or so of those who classify themselves as left of center who, according to a recent Network Contagion Research Institute poll, believe it would be “somewhat justifiable to murder President Trump.”

This is a shocking statistic - an alarm bell - for all who care about the future of our society. I have written several times about the moral dysfunction in our society, but I am still waiting for any of our church leaders to take this particular bull by the horns and speak out. By that I don’t mean the usual “baby food” of “isn’t violence terrible?” Instead I want someone to pinpoint where the rot starts - not by blaming the victim, but by locating it within the diseased hearts of the perpetrators and condemning their actions without reservation. This should be meat and drink to the average Church leader. Why then the silence?

Allen viewed his mission as a moral one - like many before him, he was unable to see that morality goes two ways. We have a moral imperative before us now, which is to assert the true meaning of the Christian faith as a moral force to counter the relativism of those who believe that murder is justified, and that the means justifies the ends. 

Would-be assassin Cole Thomas Allen was a part-time teacher. How ironic that part of the problem is an education system that raises up those who consider it nothing to break our vital social contract. If you are a Christian leader looking to affirm the basic principles upon which our society and our Christian values rest, that would be a good place to start. A reluctance to speak out, for whatever reason, condemns us as acquiescent in the face of evil. But please don’t turn it into baby food. This isn’t about preaching to the choir. Jesus didn’t come among us to be “nice”, but to speak the truth and take a stand against evil.

Father David