Peacemaking

By Bob Bongiovanni, MA

 

In his sermon on the mount , Jesus says, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God.”  I have always been intrigued by this title of “peacemaker.”  Most would think of ambassadors, doing their best to avert international warfare.  But I think the work of the peacemaker is much more common, though perhaps not common enough.  I would bet there are a number of peacemakers here this morning, even if  you don’t know it

I.            Warring archetypes

A.  Definition of archetypes

1.   The more biologically inclined Jungians have defined archetypes as the pathways that psychic energy has a propensity to follow in the psyche.

 

2.   The more mystically inclined Jungians have defined archetypes as veritable gods, embodying essential qualities of what we define as human, inspiring myth as well as modern phenomena.

B.         Archetypes long to be lived in the human realm

1.   In the realm of the collective unconscious, archetypes are in balance, their positive poles exactly counterbalancing their negative poles.

2.   They inspire and shape human thought and behavior, and thereby become pinned in space and time.  This is something they long for, because until they are so pinned in space and time they cannot transform.

 

3.   You might think of human beings as receiving units for archetypal energy, like your TV at home can take the intangible and inaudible signals and transform them into sound and picture. However, unlike televisions, we don’t all have the same tuning capability.  Our lives have shaped us in certain ways that predispose us to receive a certain spectrum of archetypal energy and not receive the rest of the spectrum.  For instance, if we experienced nothing but negative mothering, we are tuned only to the negative pole of the archetypal Mother.  Through analysis and other methods, we can widen our capability.  Ideally, we become able to receive and transform the full spectrum of every archetype.

4.   Realistically, though, only a very few people go much beyond the originally programming.  They spend their entire lives knowing only one pole of most or all archetypes.  Their lives are tragically diminished.

5.   Tragic as this is on the individual level, it also spells trouble for communities and cultures.  As I said, archetypes long to be pinned in space and time.  If they do not achieve full expression in a given individual, they express themselves by possessing one individual with one pole and a separate individual with the opposite pole, and war it out.  So, we have saints who turn themselves over to the positive pole, seeing God the Father as purely good.  And, just to even things out, we have ghoulish people who turn themselves over to a God who is dark and dreadful, lusting for blood and chaos.  These two people meet, and it’s a battle to the death.  What seems to be a battle between people is actually a battle between archetypal energies, but the blood that is spilled is very human.

6.   Just to complicate matters, sometimes both parties to a battle claim to be defending the true God, and project the evil pole onto the other side.  In reality, what you find is that both sides are possessed by both the negative and positive poles.  As they listen to their respective leaders, they are elevated to the heights of perfection and possibility, drunk with the positive energy of the archetype.  Moments later, they are on the battlefield drenched in blood, and the negative energy of the archetype reigns supreme over both sides.

7.   Let me state it plainly:  Archetypal possession always harms human beings.  The archetypes may get something out of it, but humans pay the price.  Archetypes are inhuman and collective.  They do not weep when humans die, any more than viruses weep for their victims.

8.   The fact that archetypes long to be lived in the human realm is not, in itself, the problem.  The problem arises when individual humans cannot or will not live the fullest possible spectrum of each archetype.  The part that is neglected emerges out of the shadow in the most horrific way imaginable.

II.                     Peacemakers simultaneously rescue themselves and their                      communities

A.                     How peacemakers deal with archetypal energies

1.   The ones among us who attempt to live the fullest spectrum of the archetypes, without possession by any of them, are the ones whom I call peacemakers.

2.   It’s not that they are immune to archetypal energy.  They feel it, and appropriately fear it.  But they are conscious enough of what’s going on to stand apart from the fracas and seek resolution through transformation.

3.   Peacemakers have ultimate faith in that phenomenon that Jung called the transcendent function.  This is the function that mediates opposites, expressing itself through symbols, facilitating a transition from one psychological attitude to another.  The transcendent function stands in compensatory relationship to both side of a warring conflict, enabling the poles to encounter one another one equal terms.

4.   That means that peacemakers resist the temptation to take sides when opposites collide.  They wait, instead, for some new insight to arise that makes the conflict no longer necessary.  When this amazing third emerges, peacemakers give it expression and form.  Millions of people have died in a vain attempt of one archetypal pole to triumph over the other pole.  Peacemakers are willing to die, but only in an attempt to aid in the birth of something that transcends archetypal poles.

 

B.            Examples of peacemakers:  Jesus, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin             Luther King, Jr.


1.   Jesus found himself in a world possessed by the archetypal Father.  His middle eastern world was marked by a marauding Roman empire, capable of incredible feats of innovation in engineering and philosophy, yet ultimately brutal.  Opposing the Romans were the Jews, also sublimely spiritual and advanced, yet warlike like their Yahweh.  Much to the disappointment of his zealot apostle Judas, Jesus refused to take the side of the Jews in calling the Jews to arms against their Roman oppressors.  Instead, Jesus leveled his criticism against those most possessed by negative Father among the Jews -- the Pharisees -- and urged his followers to follow the path of love that was far beyond the influence of the Father.  Indeed, for Jesus, love was the antidote for the poisonous Father that was strangling the life out of the world.  Love was the transcendent function worth dying for.

2.   Mahatma Gandhi found himself in a similar situation, but this time the invaders were British.  He, also, disappointed some people by not rallying Indians against British, and Hindu against Moslem.  Instead, he embodied nonviolence, returning love for hatred.  Ultimately, the British were shamed into departing.  Very interestingly, Gandhi was once asked about his stance on World War II, which was raging during the time.  He said it was too bad that people did not trust nonviolence enough to resolve the conflict.  True, the war was inflicting incredible pain on the people of Europe, but Gandhi believed that nonviolent resistance to him would have triumphed, at great cost in terms of human life and suffering, but no more so than the horror of the war.   It’s an interesting point to consider.  If  enough peacemakers had descended on Germany, instead of soldiers, preventing the transportation of Jews to the gas chambers, laying down their lives to contain the Nazi horror, and also containing the fury of the Allies, would the German people have allowed Hitler to slaughter, bully, and lead them mindlessly down the path to destruction?

 

3.   Martin Luther King, Jr. was inspired by both Jesus and Gandhi, adapting the philosophy of nonviolence to challenge the brutality of racism in the United States.  Here, also, was the voice of the transcend function.  “We Shall Overcome” could be the anthem of the transcendent function, expressing that undying certainty that the conflict cannot last forever.  Who among us remains faithful to his dream that we will transcend the racist hatred that so divides us?

C.                Peacemakers as Witnesses

 

1.      I have been asked many times, “In a world that is so full of violence and pain, seemingly on the brink of disaster, what can I possibly do as an individual to be a peacemaker?  Must I lay down my life, like Jesus, Gandhi, or Martin Luther King, Jr.?  Must I play out some dramatic battle on the dramatic, collective stage?”

2.      Well, maybe some of us will be called to that sort of collective destiny, and I, for one, am grateful for those who take up the challenge.  But, that is a very tiny minority of the human population.

3.      For the rest of us, I believe the critical task is being a good witness to the struggle.  That may seem like a very passive act – just observing the warring archetypes – that is unlikely to produce any meaningful peace.  Actually, I would argue that has always been the critical ingredient – the ones who take the heroic, visible roles depend on a legion of silent witnesses who pay attention to what is happening and make many small moves in response.

4.      Let’s take Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. as examples.  In both cases, these men were born into horribly violent and inhuman systems, which very few outsiders knew or cared about.  The secret to their success was their ability to draw the world’s attention to the violence and inhumanity, to ignite the compassion and indignation of the silent masses throughout the world.  Winston Churchill would never have given India its independence if the British public had not felt shame at the treatment of the Indian people and world opinion had not shamed the British parliament into action.  In the American south, African Americans had suffered hundreds of years of lynchings and beatings;  it took a few brave souls to sit down at cafeteria counters and ride buses, and be beaten in the presence of the media, to make the rest of America feel shame and compassion.   A critical moment in the civil rights struggle actually occurred in Japan.  The head of the Birmingham, Alabama Chamber of Commerce was visiting there as part of a trade mission when the mistreatment of the Freedom Riders hit the worldwide media.  His Japanese hosts suddenly cooled to his ideas of establishing better trade relations – they were clearly horrified at the incivility of his city.  They had witnessed the real Birmingham on the front pages of their own papers, thousands of miles away.

5.      That’s the very practical way of looking at it.  There’s also an esoteric way of looking at it, but that requires you to truly have faith in the reality of the Self and the psyche, as envisioned by Jung.  Recall Jung’s pivotal work, Answer to Job, in which he argues that much of the world’s suffering arises because God is unconscious and internally conflicted.  God does not fully understand what it means for human beings to suffer.  What he needs is for us to confront him – ever so carefully, as Job did – and mirror back to him what it means to suffer.  We must bear stark witness to the violence and suffering of the world, because God sees that suffering through our eyes, and therein lies the only hope for God’s conflicted nature to be healed.  In that sense, the greatest and most inhumane thing we can do is avert our gaze because it is too painful, to remain blissfully ignorant of the sufferings of our neighbors, both close and far away.  I remember a recent conversation I had with a friend about the suffering of the people of India as I had witnessed it, and their increased suffering that I fear will soon come.  He said, “Why do you care?  Just stop watching the TV, stop reading newspapers, and let them suffer if they must without being affected yourself.”  I replied, “That would conflict with my deepest belief system.  I MUST bear witness – that is my call, as I see it.  Even if it horrifies me – particularly if it horrifies me – I must mirror back to God the consequences of his shadowy unconsciousness.  Otherwise, all hope is truly lost, for me, for those I love, and for them.”  So, when I see something horrific, in person or via the media, I direct a comment to the Self – “Don’t you see?  How much longer will this continue?  Can you not have mercy on suffering humanity?”  To those who do not believe in the reality of the psyche and Jung’s concept of the Self, I am sure that sounds like a pathetically feeble act that will change nothing.  I beg to differ, but that is a matter of faith.

 

 

D.                                   Conclusion

1.   I would like to close with a brief quote from Mindell’s book, Sitting in the Fire:

The fire that burns in the social, psychological, and spiritual dimensions of humanity can ruin the world.  Or, this fire can transform trouble into community.  It’s up to us.  We can avoid contention, or we can fearlessly sit in the fire, intervene, and prevent world history’s most painful errors from being repeated.