Jesus’s emissary summoned to the Pentagon: Moral clarity in the modern era
To borrow from Mr. Crowe's 1989 'Say Anything', Jesus does not sell war, buy war, or process war as a career.
Perhaps every generation is destined to ask, “What is the world coming to these days?” Adulthood seems to demand the question as a right of passage into shaping what we will leave behind for those we loved and those who loved us.
What feels especially disquieting about asking the question now is the recognition that each generation seems capable of surpassing the last in the scale of harm we can unleash, once our small thoughts are paired with our increasingly powerful tools.
The recognition is sharpening our collective anxiety, and it is deepening the layers of trauma and difficulty we are now navigating as a society.
As signs of these times, this Easter brought Pope Leo XIV’s message of peace; another Easter Day message circulated on social media threatening the destruction of an entire ancient civilization; a report in The Free Press the following day alleging aggressive, pressure‑laden tactics toward Vatican representatives by U.S. officials; and, as of 4:00 a.m. EST today, a social‑media post by an individual cosplaying Jesus Christ from the former 1940s Truman deco-green bath at the White House.
The Free Press article suggested that officials of the United States government had summoned Vatican representative Cardinal Pierre to the Pentagon in January 2026.
In a scene that would have been uncomfortable even for the most hardened Popes and Kings of the darker ages, the Under Secretary for Defense is alleged to have attempted to strong‑arm Cardinal Pierre — a representative of God, the Holy Spirit, the Vatican, Pope Leo, and Jesus Christ — into endorsing war.
To borrow from Mr. Crowe's 1989 Say Anything, Jesus should not be asked, or strong-armed into selling war, buying war, or processing war as a career.
Peace and conflict resolution ease tensions because their absence inevitably generates, or supports the opposite. Wherever peace is neglected, conflict fills the space; wherever peaceful acts are practiced, that tension begins to loosen.
A commitment to the principle of de-escalation and conflict resolution is a peaceful act. Commitment inevitably requires an active loyalty to the principle. Peaceful acts are not faucets we turn on and off – from morning to night, we must actively commit to choosing a peaceful path over a non-peaceful one – the next right thing, if you will.
Granted, we are not perfect, but the aim is to try our very, very best at all times—and this holds true whether one understands peace as a practical act, a logical preference, or a theological duty.
Peace is all things: an agreement; a commitment; a discipline; diplomacy; a promise; urgently needed as a lifestyle; and, a model for our children, and theirs.
Have we no vision of a better world for children?
Thucydides argued that war forces individuals to match their passions to their environment. And if history teaches us anything, it is that environments conducive to war and conflict spread to other environments.
“War is a violent teacher, and brings most men’s passions to the same level as their circumstances.” — Thucydides.
What Science Says About War and Conflict Resolution
In 1943, the psychologist Abraham Harold Maslow proposed a hierarchy of needs — a theory of human motivation. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs arranged human needs into a pyramid of five categories. At the bottom were a human’s basic needs: air, water, food, shelter, sleep, clothing, and reproduction. Maslow theorized that until and unless these basic needs were met, people could not focus on their higher needs: safety and security; love and belonging; self‑esteem; and finally, self‑realization — which sits at the top of the pyramid.
Consider the top level of the pyramid as what we aspire to be: our sense of morality, creativity, spontaneity, and our pursuit of purpose. The top of the pyramid is where the outward flow of our truest and best selves moves into the world around us.
Maslow argued that unless and until foundational needs were met, an individual could not focus, and would not embrace their higher self. Unmet lower‑tier needs, he believed, lead to significantly more conflict.
The bottom four levels (physiological, safety, belonging, esteem) are known as “deficiency needs” (or D‑needs). When these needs are unmet, they create distress and anxiety, which drive behavioral changes aimed at fulfilling them — often at the expense of harmonious relationships.
Cognitive Load, Moral Clarity, and the Conditions Necessary to Decrease Conflict
While Maslow’s theory helps us understand how unmet needs drive conflict and inhibit resolution, cognitive‑load research helps explain what happens when the mind is overwhelmed, flooded, or stretched beyond its natural capacity.
Psychologists studying moral decision‑making have shown that when individuals are under high cognitive load — when they are exhausted, frightened, distracted, or inundated with information — their moral reasoning narrows. People become more reactive, more susceptible to simplified narratives, and more likely to default to decisions that prioritize immediate outcomes over long‑term human consequences.
In one study, participants placed under heavy cognitive strain were more likely to make stark, utilitarian choices. In another, individuals under load were more inclined to prioritize collective outcomes over individual dignity when the two were placed in tension.
Across multiple experiments, researchers found that overwhelm blunts empathy: the more taxed the mind, the harder it becomes to hold another person’s perspective with clarity, or compassion.
Not all moral decisions shift under pressure — some remain remarkably stable. Deeply internalized moral rules, such as “do not kill” or “do not harm a child” tend to hold firm even under cognitive strain.
Strongly socialized norms — the habitual moral reflexes shaped by culture, upbringing, or faith — also remain steady. But the pattern is clear enough to matter: overload reduces the space in which empathy, patience, and discernment can operate. It makes peace harder to choose.
Cognitive overload forces individuals to act in less empathetic terms. And in a world saturated with traumatic images, crisis, noise, speed, misinformation, disinformation, and a near‑total erosion of personal time, space, and reflection, cognitive overload may compel people to ignore the human consequences of their decisions.
Three Practices to Cultivate Calm in Daily Life
- Reduce cognitive overload.
Create a daily period free from news, scrolling, and digital activity — a small, protected space in which the mind can breathe again.
- Strengthen your foundations.
Choose one of Maslow’s lower‑tier needs — sleep, safety, belonging, or esteem — and make a deliberate effort to support it in your life. Even small improvements in these foundational areas increase stability, clarity, and empathy.
- Practice empathy as a discipline.
Empathy is not only a feeling; it is an act of attention. Strengthen it by briefly contemplating another person’s perspective, or by replacing a judgmental thought with a more compassionate one.
