Can Catholics Support Black Lives Matter? Part Four: Violence

Last updated on: September 17, 2020 at 2:04 pm by Gabriel Blanchard

Can Catholics Support Black Lives Matter? Part Four: Violence 2020-09-17T14:04:17-04:00 Gabriel Blanchard

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Previous installments in this series: Intro to BLM; Marxism; Is BLM Marxist?

Let’s take a look at charge number two: that BLM supports violence. I’ll say up-front that while I’m personally committed to nonviolence, I don’t consider self-defense wrong. If BLM members have done violent things, that’s not an automatic mark against them. We have to know the context. And most opponents of BLM would agree. At least, that’s exactly the argument they always make to defend the police when they hurt or kill somebody.

So let’s talk. When violence is okay?

Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. “If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful.” … Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. … If non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect the people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the dignity of the human person.1

Violence—even violence wielded by a legal authority—may only ever be used in self-defense or the defense of the community. Even then, only the minimum you need to stop an attacker is legitimate. That makes sense, really. If you’re using violence when you don’t need to, or using more than you need, then you’re the aggressor, aren’t you? Putting a uniform on that behavior doesn’t make it any better. And while a government might authorize people to behave that way, it doesn’t have the moral right to do so. Wrong is wrong. Whether it’s legal makes no difference.

But maybe only police officers have a right to use violence? Well, why? There are such things as dirty cops. Are people not allowed to defend themselves against them? And even if every cop were Mr. Rogers with a glock, you can’t always reach them. And again, where did the police get the right to protect the community from? In a democracy,2 isn’t law enforcement supposed to be the community’s way of protecting itself? Because if not, they sound more like an occupying force than a police force.

There’s a lot I’m leaving out here. The theory of what police are and should be is kind of complex, and the history of policing in the US has links to slavery, too. Short version: I think both individuals and communities have a right to protect themselves, and that includes protecting themselves against cops, if the cops are being more violent than they need to.

quick, shoot the paint before it spreads

You may have heard the expression direct action from activists. That can include violence, but it’s a little broader. Roughly speaking, it means using power to directly achieve a specific goal. Its counterpart, indirect action, normally means some negotiated process (from legislation to diplomacy). Direct action can be nonviolent or violent. It covers things like strikes, sit-ins, destroying property, and, yes, physical violence. Direct action is often associated with more extreme people on the Left, but you can find it in most movements. The Boston Tea Party is a classic example of direct action. Protesters, in disguise, destroyed a massive amount of property—$1.7 billion worth!

Now, the quote from the Catechism above gives us guidelines for violence. But when is, say, a sit-in the right choice, a là Rosa Parks? When are workers justified in going on strike? These questions are more prudential, I think, and there’s some grey area. When we get into things like hacking or vandalism, stuff that doesn’t hurt anybody directly or make property unusable but does screw it up, we should be cautious. But that doesn’t mean these tactics are always off-limits, nor that they’re equivalent to violence.3 We just need to examine them carefully. Using the Catechism’s principles about violence, a good question to ask is: “Is such-and-such tactic a proportionate response to the harm that’s threatening me or my community?”

Okay. Now we’re in a better position to answer our original question. Does BLM support violence? And if the answer’s “Yes,” what exactly does that mean?

Continued in Reporting on Violence, Is BLM Violent?, Is BLM Anti-Family?, Does BLM Support the Gay Agenda?, Does BLM Support Abortion?, and So What?

1Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§2264-2267; internal quotation from the Summa.

2Yes, I know we’re technically a democratic republic. No, I don’t think that’s at all relevant here.

3If it did mean those things, we’d have to question not only the American Revolution, but the resistance movements of World War II. They operated mostly through sabotage, arson, and the like.

Previous Post

August 18, 2020

Can Catholics Support Black Lives Matter? Part Three: Is BLM Marxist?

Next Post

August 26, 2020 Can Catholics Support Black Lives Matter? Part Five: Reporting on Violence

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category abuse antifascism art bad Catholic celibacy chastity Church crucifixion culture war eros forgiveness gay gender homophobia ikons language liturgy peace poems politics Pope Francis prayer pro-life race recommendations reform repentance review sacraments saints satire scandal schism scripture sex suffering theology Uncategorized violence

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What Christian group does not celebrate Christmas?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Baptists Methodists Jehovah’s Witnesses Orthodox Christians