Last week, the Governor of Maine ordered all flags to be hung at half-mast for a month in honor of Gerald Ford, the thirty-eighth President of the United States. There are three flags that fly on the flagpole outside my office, The U.S. flag, the flag of the State of Maine and the old “chicken footed” peace flag. In order to fly the flags at half-mast, the peace flag had to be removed and brought inside; I chose to drape it across an easel opposite my desk. As I have looked at the flag all week, I was re-reminded that we are not interested in “working on” peace or “standing for” peace and we know peace can’t be “reached.” Peace is a way of being in the world, a place to come from, not to get to. Why, given what we know, is the process so slow and seemingly endless?
The primary reason we have not created an outbreak of peace is because we would rather be right than create peace. And we’ve got it just the way we want it. Or so it would seem. It appears as if we actually want violence and poverty to continue. Here’s why…In the United States, the most read newspaper is The National Enquirer and the WWF (World Wrestling Federation) is becoming one of the larger forces in the electronic media.
“But I don’t read The National Enquirer and I don’t watch that violent, scripted wrestling. It’s them. It’s those people.”
No, really it’s not. It’s about the fact that we have not learned to communicate without condemning people, as I just did to make the point. Every person who reads The National Enquirer and watches the WWF wants peace as much as anyone else. We will only end this endless search by recognizing that there is not place to look but every close to home – in the mirror, in the way we lead our lives, our corporations, and the things we promote through our religions. The reason we cannot see peace is that it is most difficult to look inside.
Sending twenty thousand more troops to Iraq will not bring about peace. Not sending twenty thousand more troops will not bring about peace. These are strategic decisions and because they are not held in a true context of peace, no matter what decision is made, we will be no closer to creating peace.
True peace is a way of being, a state of mind, a place to come from not to get to. These are not cute phrases, politically correct words or simple linguistic preferences; this process is going to require some things from each of us. It will require that we realize that every single thing we do is either about peace or not. Every single time we condemn another person, we are not about peace. To condemn The President is to not be about peace. To love him and treat him with dignity and respect and disagree with him at the same time is to be about peace.
Let’s start with the mirror. If we cannot master what is here, it is highly likely that we will not master anything beyond us. Some questions that come to mind:
Am I treating people in my family with dignity, grace and loving-kindness?
Do I speak in a way that honors each person I speak with, including the bank teller and the clerk in the supermarket?
Do I drive with courtesy, regardless of the actions of others?
Do I respect the right of others to disagree with me?
Do I leave things in good shape for others?
Do I recognize that all I truly control is myself and how I am being in the world?
Do I refrain from speaking ill of any person?
Do I request that others not speak ill of people in my presence?
Let’s shift for a moment to our businesses and places of work, assuming that we have mastered our way of being as individuals.
Does the company I work for have standards regarding working conditions?
Does it have standards regarding the working conditions of the companies that supply its products? (For a massive turnaround, see Wal-Mart is the past three years. It has gone from this issue not being on the radar screen to being one of the best corporate citizens around.)
Is the voice of every employee valued?
Are people treated with dignity, grace and loving-kindness in reality and as a part of company policy?
Is the effect of decisions regarding people and the environment always a factor in setting policy?
What commitments are being made to contribute to the people and communities from whom our profit is made?
What percentages of profits are given to support agencies that work to create opportunities for others?
And now for perhaps the most difficult arena of them all, our religious institutions and the messages we send through them. Every single religious institution must ask itself some pretty hard questions if we are to be about peace. Thich Nhat Hanh says that until there is peace among our religions, there will be no peace. We must come to a place where no belief that I hold gives me the right to condemn or damage another human being.
Do I strive to insure that the “rightness” of my beliefs never includes the condemnation of others?
Do I treat those with whom I disagree with dignity, grace and loving-kindness?
Am I more concerned with what I do than with how others are acting?
Does my belief system infringe on the rights of others?
What would give me the right to condemn another’s belief?
Are we willing to admit that in the name of religion we have committed serious crimes against people? (Pope John Paul II is the only religious leader I am aware of who called for profound apology for the damage done in the name of The Holy Catholic Church.)
The reasons that peace seems so illusive are because we keep looking in the wrong place. Once we recognize that there is no place to look but to ourselves, we can create and be at peace. The most important decision is the decision to be about peace. Once that is done, then “the what” to do next becomes perfectly clear.
There is no peace to reach.
We can make agreements, we must create peace. And the outbreak of peace is inside YOUR heart.
