Beautiful Souls by Eyal Press, Chapter 3: The Rules of Conscience

Press opens his third chapter with the story of Henry David Thoreau and Thoreau’s famous support for claims of personal conscienceness and actions of civil disobedience. Press quotes Thoreau: “I am not responsible for the successful working of the machinery of society. The only obligation which I have a right to assume, is to do at any time what I think right.” Press insightfully evaluates Thoreau’s starkly individualistic claim, “[Thoreau’s claim] is a bracingly uncomprimising worldview. But if this is all that saying no entails, what beyond salving one’s own conscience comes of it? If one person’s subjective values can be invoked to break the law and resist government, why can’t another, radically different set of personal convictions?” (p. 87) Press continues to pose questions, but his point has already been made – who gets to decide “right” and “wrong.” Differing sides could take up the argument for a long time and ideological trench warfare ensues…if you are sceptical, look at Washington, D.C. and the lack of progress that has come out of the recent political quagmire there. Press introduces us to his main character of chapter 3, Avner Wishnitzer, and takes us on a journey describing Avner’s experience in the Israeli Army, a journey that helps to answer the question of personal conscience.

Avner Wishnitzer was born and raised on a kibbutz in Israel, Kvutzat Shiller. A lean and gawky youth, Avner took to Tae Kwon Do in his early teens and was a junior national champion by age 17. A quiet and thoughtful person by nature, the discipline of Tae Kwon Do helped Avner expand his horizons and discover many things about himself, including the fact that he had the toughness and discipline to complete the training to become a member of the elite group Sayeret Matkal. Avner served his time in this elite Army group and then left active duty, continuing to serve as a Reservist when duty called. However, his sister invited him to a lecture that introduced him to yet unknown (unknown by Avner) challenges of the Palestinian people. Avner was troubled by what he saw and his personal commitments and understandings of the world underwent great examination. Press presents his readers with a detailed description of Avner’s dilemmas, presenting relevant information of the Israeli Army and its closeknit makeup, the familial bonds of the Army and how the Army is viewed in Israel. The unique character of the Israeli people and their history presented Avner with many difficult decisions as he slowly pursued his desire to take action against Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian people in the “occupied territories.” Avner, and fellow Army members who objected, received harsh treatment from many people, some very close friends and family members. Press also introduces his readers to a few minor characters who refuse to take action against Jewish settlers, in effect taking the opposite position of Avner and his colleagues. Again, who is right as one stands up and takes actions based on personal conscience and how far can they be allowed to take their cause? Press details a short history of conscientious objectors in the US and points to the large scale problem experienced during the Vietnam War era: “Accommodating a smattering of Christian pacifists had been easy enough. Granting citizens of any spiritual or ideological persuasion the right to refuse to fight in particular wars, simply because it didn’t line up with what they believed to be right, was another matter entirely.” (p. 108) Press points to the challenging nature of conflict and the role of any government in taking actions to support the claims and treaties of the country but realizing some of the nation’s citizens will object. Again, who is right and who gets to decide?

Eyal Press closes his chapter with a thoughtful quote from Susan Sontag: “Appeal to the existence of a higher law that authorizes us to defy the laws of the state can be used to justify criminal transgession as well as the noblest struggle for justice. It is the content of the resistance that determines its merit, its moral necessity.” (p. 121) Sontag’s quote helps us get closer to the answer of who might be right when saying no, but Press adds one final thought to fill our imaginations a bit more. Press writes, “…assessing the ability – or inability – of those saying no to stretch their moral imaginations by putting themselves in the shoes of people who were suffering and extending sympathy to them.” (p. 122) The essence of chapter 3 is for us to realize that in the course of our lives, if we are open to the changing ways of the world and our own personal growing awareness of the world, we will be challenged to stretch our moral imaginations; and hopefully we will succeed in stretching to the point where we can put ourselves in the shoes of others and do something that matters.

Questions for reflection:

• Have you ever experienced an occasion that required you to act differently from the “rules” or the “expectations” of your group? What were your challenges and what compelled you to take action; or what concerns caused you to not take action?
• During this time of Lent, read the Passion of Christ (in any of the four Gospels) and consider the challenges of Jesus as he stands up to the authorities, and consider what gives him his confidence in his time of despair, even as his friends leave him. Follow Jesus to the cross and imagine yourself in this scene – what do you learn about yourself?