You don’t see a lot of “Catholic” protests, that is, a protest that is remembered by history as specifically Catholic. But, in the scope of 1969, the Catonsville Nine, though still incredibly important, were just another protest, if they can be referred to in that way. What really strikes me about the Catonsville Nine is the connections that they have to other Catholic movements in recent times with similar motives and ideals.
In one of my political science classes, I learned about the idea of “liberation theology,” which is a form of radical Catholicism pioneered by a handful of Catholic priests in the later 1900s. Liberation theology is radical in that it presents the life of Christ as not the gold standard of Christianity, but the only standard: the poverty, the persecution, the love of others. According to these priests, this was the true way of Catholicism, because it followed the radical teachings of Christ to the letter, and took precepts such as helping the poor to the most extreme level possible. But, similar to the ideals of the Catonsville Nine, the idea of liberation theology has seen some pushback among both the laity and Church authorities, though it is now highly touted by Pope Francis.
In his time in the trial, Father Philip Berrigan called out both the United States government and the bishops of the United States, who he called out for being “cowards” and insisting that they “learn something of the Gospels.” Many people believe the Church is or must be a fully cohesive, unified organization, but the Catonsville Nine saw a problem within the Church and their country and addressed it, despite what their superiors might have believed. That sort of commitment to justice, along with that proposed by the creators of liberation theology, is precisely what is required of Catholics, even though certain individuals in the Church may have disagreed.
Your post made me think, why did liberation theology come into popularity during the late 1900s, along with all the social actions performed by its adherents? It could be that development in theology and biblical interpretation produced the idea of liberation theology, which in turn informed the actions of radical Catholics. But it could also be that demands for social justice needed a theological justification to radicalize the Church, so some Catholic priests came up with the idea to justify them. I think the latter plays a bigger role. Historically, Christianity has been morphed to justify a variety of social and political actions, including the seemingly unthinkable like the Crusades. Despite the claim that the Bible should govern all of a Christian’s actions, we nevertheless find that most of the time Christianity is just used to justify the actions afterwards, and there is no apparent reason that this case is any different. Therefore, instead of a leading ideological role in the Civil Rights movement in 1968, Christianity might just be a tool used to rally up people from different groups to join actions that were already underway.
I think you make a good point about the Catholic Church in this post here. I think looking at it from this standpoint for the Catonsville Nine, we are given better insight to the motivation and the passion behind their actions. Obviously, Philip Barrigan was motivated from a deep sense of doing what is right, just as Christ did in his time. Christ was not met with open arms for many of the things he did and taught. This influence from the Catholic faith and Jesus’s example of doing what is right despite facing persecution can be seen directly through Barrigan’s actions and intentions for his civil disobedience. The true calling of Catholics are to do the work of Jesus, and Barrigan believed that he was doing this work, which is why his actions and message were understandable.