Covington Catholic School student Nick Sandmann (left) and American Indian activist Nathan Phillips (right)
At the end of the March for Life events on Friday afternoon, a group of kids from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky were in front of the Lincoln Memorial waiting for their bus to head back home. The students from the school were all teen boys, and they wore the much-talked-about red "MAGA" hats as a sort of identifier to keep together as a group. On the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, a group of Black religious cultists affiliated with the "Black Hebrew Israelites" was demonstrating about something, and their attention became fixed on the young Covington students, whom they started to jeer at and spit venomous racial epithets such as calling the kids "dirty Crackers" and other names, including some derogatory homosexual references. In the middle of all that, this crazy Indian guy beating a drum and chanting makes his way into the middle of the group of kids, and comes face-to-face with one of the students, Nick Sandmann, and then proceeds to beat his drum in this kid's face. Not knowing what else to do (what can you do when a crazy man is beating a drum at you impromptu in your face?) Nick just stands there and smiles, doing nothing (a wise move on his part, and actually commendable due to the aggressive nature of the old Indian guy banging a drum right in his ear). And, that touched off a mess - the kids were labeled as "racist," accused of "harassing" the Indian guy, and of course, the secular media eats this up without revealing the facts behind the whole thing. All of this, incidentally, was based on footage from a few seconds of video. In a short time, however, another longer video surfaces, and it clearly showed the kids were innocent of the slander being directed at them by a gullible public and a ravenous secular media. The kids - in particular, Sandmann and his family - endured death threats, condemnation from even their own diocesan bishop (who himself should have known better), and possible destruction of their futures. Why all this hubbub, and why is it that despite the evidence some still vilify these poor kids? Let us first examine the other players in the drama, and we'll go from there.
The American Indian guy was a noted activist named Nathan Phillips, who is presented as an "elder" as well as reportedly being a Vietnam veteran. Phillips is 63 years old, and in doing some research on the guy I found out he has a history of this type of activism. Also, his status as a veteran is somewhat ambiguous as well, as given his age he would have technically been too young to serve in Vietnam. Also, although he may have a good service record as being in the military (which I wouldn't dispute) the man could not have been a combat veteran either. And, as far as his status as a "Native elder," it would probably be wise to get verification of that from the tribe he identifies with, as American Indians don't take that title lightly - they highly venerate and honor the elders, or "Old Ones," as some call them, and thus the office of "elder" in a tribe is something that one cannot claim but is bestowed as an honor - does Phillips have that distinction? Best to ask his tribal leadership first.
Let's now talk about these "Black Israelites" that more or less instigated the entire thing. There is a cultic movement, dating back to 1979, called the "Black Hebrew Israelites" that was founded by a Black racist radical by the name of Yahweh ben Yahweh (1935-2007 - actual name is Hulon Mitchell Jr.). According to the thinking of this group, the "real" Israelites of the Bible were all Black, and the Jews and Whites in general to them were considered "satanic oppressors and infidels." In that, Yahweh ben Yahweh mirrors several other Black religious leaders, such as Elijah Mohammed (and his successor Louis Farrakhan) who led the Nation of Islam, "Black Liberation" theologian James Cone (as well as his proteges such as Al Sharpton and Jeremiah Wright), and to a lesser degree the "African Zion" movement of the 1920's of Marcus Garvey. Interesting enough too, Yahweh ben Yahweh actually taught that Whites and Jews, as well as former members who left the cult, were to be killed, and this idea led to his own conviction in 1991 of conspiring to murder - it was even reported that one of his victims was decapitated. The people on Friday who were at the Licoln Memorial were followers of this guy, and thus that speaks volumes of their intentions.
Yahweh ben Yahweh (Hulon Michell Jr.), founder of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement
Now let's talk about Nathan Phillips (born 1954) a little. Phillips is a 63-year-old Native American activist who has a history of demonstrations that often are characterized by the same face-to-face confrontation we saw Friday with Sandmann. He is part of the Omaha Nation, and although born into the Omaha, he was taken and raised by a White family at an early age. His military service is verifiable, although he enlisted in 1972 at the age of 17 and thus never really was part of the Vietnam conflict because he received his Honorable Discharge in 1976 (the Vietnam conflict ended in 1973). His big claim to fame was the "Standing Rock" protests which were directed against the Dakota Pipeline in 2012, and that led to a music video entitled "Make it Bun Dem." In 2015, he was involved in an incident similar to the encounter with the Covington students at Eastern Michigan University, where he claimed he was "harassed" by students there too although evidence also exists to the contrary. His presence in Washington this past week was for his participation in the Indigenous People's March, which was held at the same time as the March for Life. All of this together shows that there is more to the story than perhaps the "mainstream media" wanted to spin, and let's talk about that now.
First, my thoughts on Phillips are mixed. I am myself of at least 1/16 Mvskoke Indian ancestry, and in my opinion, the Indigenous People's March and the March for Life are both valid things that both deserve support. The plight of American Indians is a real one, but fortunately, in recent decades more awareness of it has made discrimination against them almost non-existent. Most American Indians are also decent people, although many nations of them are plagued with social problems (alcoholism is a big one on many reservations, especially out West). At the forefront of recognizing the dignity of American Indians as persons is the Catholic Church, which in its history in the US has done more to aid the native populations than almost any other religious organization. As for Phillips himself, while I highly doubt he can be called a "Vietnam veteran," he is nonetheless still a veteran in that he honorably served our nation, and that I respect him for - he received his Honorable Discharge, and has a valid military record, although not a combat veteran. Also, as a member of the Omaha Nation, he is to be respected for his rich cultural heritage, and that is not in dispute either - as a descendant of Mvskoke Indians myself, I see common ground with the man on that. However, what is problematic is that Phillips seems to be on the wrong end of the political spectrum - he expects "progressive" liberals to share his values, but he is sadly deluded in that, and in that delusion he has bought into their "victimhood" and entitlement mentality, which does neither him nor the Omaha people he is part of any good. The encounter with the Covington students, in particular the singling-out of Nick Sandmann, demonstrates how ridiculous this mindset is, and as an American Indian supposedly with the title of "elder" (that still needs verification from the Omaha Nation leadership honestly) he should be setting a better example. What he did was stupid, and honestly, it was fodder for the secularists and the pro-abortion crowd who want to discredit the March for Life, and I have a couple of my own thoughts on that. First, I want to state up-front that what I am about to say is my opinion only and is not to be taken as stone-hard fact; there is a possibility I could be proven wrong for what I am about to speculate, so I am open to correcting it and will do so if necessary. It has been my contention for some time that many of these incidents are staged by certain individuals who pay "activists" and "demonstrators" to create a stink to discredit those they oppose - I believe we saw that in Charlottesville a couple of years ago, when it came to light that some of the "neo-Nazis" were in fact paid actors. I am not going to state as fact that this is the case with Phillips, but the whole thing is just a little off - why did he just all of a sudden show up, make his way into a group of Catholic school kids, and start banging a drum in one kid's face totally impromptu? I am seriously thinking (again, this is just me and I could be wrong) that more will come to the surface on that later. And, that leads me to a couple of other thoughts.
Although the secular leftists and their "lamestream media" lapdogs have tended to ignore the March for Life in the past (they were more focused in the past couple of years on the obscene "pussy-hat" Women's Marchers that occur the following day, which draws far fewer numbers), it is obvious that the pro-life movement must be causing some angst for the Lefties with its huge base of support, so they I believe are in an orchestrated effort to discredit the movement any way possible. Also, both Left and Right somehow view the American Indians as untouchable, and always have, this despite the fact that most American Indians are aloof from that political battleground and those that are involved in it are equally distributed on both the Right and Left ends of the political spectrum. So, what better weapon then for the Left than to utilize an old Native guy to initiate a confrontation with a group of Catholic school kids - who is going to dare come against a venerated "Native elder?" The mentality a lot of times with the American Indians is similar to what some Evangelicals have in regard to Jewish people (and being of some Sephardi heritage myself, I identify with them too) in that anything the modern nation of Israel does is "beyond reproach" and therefore exempt from individual scrutiny. Fact is though, both Jews and American Indians are fellow human beings, and are prone to the same concupiscent nature as the rest of the human race is - a fruit of the Fall, I would add. That means that although we respect them, and even champion their cause as a people, at the same time there will be those individuals among them who do dumb things, sin, and make mistakes - Nathan Phillips is no different in that he is a fallible man just like the rest of us. So, whatever the facts eventually reveal, the thing is Phillips invaded young Sandmann's space unprovoked, and he was wrong. However, let us also remember that this was Phillips' stupidity, and doesn't reflect on every Native American in the nation - many of them probably think he was stupid too in doing what he did. With video evidence now showing that the students did nothing to provoke this man, nor did they respond violently, I think a round of apologies is in order to these young men, in particular, Sandmann.
Now let's talk about the Catholic response to this. One hallmark of the Catholic faith is that our dealings with our fellow man focus on three things:
1. The dignity of the personhood of all
2. The allowance of supernatural grace to elevate, heal, and perfect us on a daily basis
3. Appealing to both faith and reason in every circumstance
The Catholic Diocese of Covington, KY, where these boys and their school are located, issued an official condemnation of the boys as if blaming them for this incident. The Bishop of the diocese was premature in his conclusion, and before spouting off official edicts he should have waited for all the facts to be presented before having a knee-jerk reaction to the incident (if some of these bishops would have been that quick to act in the sex abuse crises that have plagued the Church recently, which had much more tangible evidence available, we might have had some resolution now to that). Our own Archbishop of Baltimore, William Lori, followed suit much to my own disappointment, and that was tragic as well. So, I think it is time I give our good bishops a lesson from our own Catechism of the Catholic Church in regard to this matter. First, I would like to direct Bishops Foye and Lori to CCC 2477, which says this: "Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury." Further in the same paragraph, "(He becomes guilty) of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor." This is elaborated further in CCC 2478, which reminds us (via a reference from St. Ignatius of Loyola's Spiritual Exercises) that "To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor's thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way." Moving on to CCC 2479, it says this: "Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one's neighbor...Thus, detraction and honor offend against the virtues of justice and charity." In CCC 1753, we are reminded also that "the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation." Then there is CCC 1791, which reminds us that "This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man 'takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.' In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he (or she - my add) commits." This leads us now also to the words of Scripture, in particular, the commands of the Decalogue, which form one of the "Four Pillars of Catechesis." Exodus 20:16 states that the ninth commandment (or 8th for some) is this - "thou shalt not bear false witness." Although many in the past have interpreted this as the sin of lying, it really isn't (although often lies are entailed in it). In reality, it is a prohibition against defamation of another's character and gossip, and it is complementary to one of Jesus's commands that often is misconstrued and misapplied these days - the mandate in Matthew 7:1 to "judge not lest ye be judged." What God has already judged, by the way, is exempt from this so we can speak out against abominations such as "same-sex marriage" without violating this verse, but that is a whole other subject. In the context of the verse, Jesus is admonishing his followers not to draw hasty conclusions about individuals without first knowing the facts (faith + reason, in other words). If anything, this verse could be easily applied as well to racism, which is a direct violation of almost every commandment. As it relates to the Covington students though, it is the bishops as well as others who condemned them without knowing the facts who violate the principle behind both of these Scriptural mandates. So, if I were Bishops Foye and Lori, I would be paying a visit to my personal confessor to straighten this out, and then I would apologize to Sandmann and the other young men for "bearing false witness" against them. The bishops are the leadership of the Church, and they bear more accountability for this sort of thing, so they should be setting the example by owning up to their own rash judgments. Hopefully as more evidence comes available, they will do just that.
My heart really goes out for Sandmann and the other kids from Covington who were unfortunately at the wrong place at the wrong time. They are bright young men, and by all accounts good students and strong in their Catholic faith. They also have the potential for good futures ahead, at least until this happened. Now, a sinful bishop threatens them with expulsion over something they were innocent of, and it has consequences - these young men could have their entire futures ruined, and that is tragic. I hope that Phillips can sleep at night over the turmoil he has caused children, and honestly, if I were the Omaha nation I would consider maybe giving him the boot for this nonsense. And, if Bishop Foye doesn't recant his initial condemnation of these young men, he doesn't need to be a spiritual leader of his diocese, and perhaps it is time to look for a bishop with more integrity if that is all that Foye can do. A young man's future doesn't need to be destroyed by a bunch of racebaiters and autocratic bishops, and they should not be punished for something that they have truly been vindicated for. As this unfolds more, I may have more to say later, but for today I feel this is sufficive to express my own feelings. Thank you for allowing me to share.
