I begin here by admitting that I never heard of Charlie Kirk until the day he was killed earlier this week. Like you, I know that we will hear and learn much more about him in the weeks, months, and years ahead, especially his movement, Turning Point USA, that engages young people in community affairs and the national political process. His tragic death, coupled with the anniversary of 9-11 and other violent killings this year, might produce new life that offers a new direction, as did the assassinations of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert Kennedy in the spring and summer of 1968. Perhaps, much as our faith teaches that from death comes life, the impact can be a turning point for civil discourse in our country.
Kirk employed many characteristics of classic learning styles that go back to Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Jesus, Augustine, Aquinas, Ignatius, and numerous other great minds that influence learners to soar to higher levels. Augustine fostered understanding through dialogue, accepting students where they are and encouraging them to build upon their natural gifts and interests while igniting curiosity and challenging them to ask questions that open doors which lead to more knowledge and greater understanding. Aquinas inspired learners to contemplate what they believe in as a way to discover purpose and meaning; he held that by developing ideas and welcoming new information we will gain holistic understanding, even if we can never fully grasp it. Ignatius developed ways to dialogue, debate, and discern guided by the Holy Spirit; his method helps us reverence other viewpoints, presume the goodness of others, and adopt patience in acquiring wisdom to chart a course to proceed.
I was privileged to help implement the classical liberal arts model of education while at Saint Charles Borromeo Academy in Kansas City’s northland. Like Charlie Kirk’s method, it employed language, logic, and rhetoric. Starting with grammar and language, it develops young minds by insisting on words rather than weapons. Children who are frustrated in persuading another or who do not get their way may revert to hitting, crying, or screaming; but those responses are not acceptable; instead, they are taught to use words. If children learn this at a young age, they will probably not grow up to be one of those adults that act out, throw tantrums, or use weapons rather than words. This way of learning utilizes the Socratic method: discussions that probe with open-ended questions which bring students, through active dialogue rather than passive intake, to use reason and logic toward self-discovery. This style encourages learners to read, absorb, think critically, and express themselves through effective communication.
As Socrates taught Plato this style of critical thinking, so did Plato teach Aristotle to transform ideas into dialogue, and so did Aristotle develop logic in dealing with the world and others. Jesus engaged people in similar ways though rooted in faith that builds upon values, principles, and structures that trust in God’s providence. Like Kirk, Jesus met people where they are and wanted to accompany them to a more elevated place. I wish that the Catholic Church was better about civil discourse. We have had our fair share of leaders who are not open-minded or who do not value civility when addressing someone who opposes doctrine. My sister and I recently recorded a podcast that challenged people to realize that hating President Trump is out of line with basic Catholic dignity or does not offer integrity to our faith, but it was met with ridicule by some. Though it seems we have arrived at some bad, foggy, unstable, ominous spot in our ability to advance the mission of our nation and our God, perhaps the death of Charlie Kirk is a turning point that will take us to a better place.
UPON THIS ROCK 
Great article! I couldn’t agree with you more, Father Don.
Patty Evans House
LikeLike
I too had never heard of Charlie Kirk until his death. It’s one thing to admire someone’s style of teaching or addressing issues however the content of his message is another thing. He is a white supremacist, against Martin Luther King and Civil Rights, believed “prowling blacks go around for fun to go target white people”, against immigration – believed that immigrants and black were replacing white rural Americans,, for gun control, believed mass shootings were the work of folks who were transgender, believed wives should submit to their husbands.
It’s also important to look at Tyler Robinson who grew up in a devout Mormon and Republican household. The family believed in the right to bear arms and were avid hunters. His parents were strong supporters of Donald Trump. It was Tyler’s father, Mark, a 27 year veteran of the Washington County Sherriff’s Department, who turned him in to authorities. You can only imagine what the Father was feeling as he peacefully ended the man hunt by ‘doing the right thing’ knowing full well what lay ahead for his son.
So who is the hero here and who is the bad guy? How did a young bright man surrounded by a supporting family kill another bright young white charismatic man preaching such unethical and immoral platitudes. Or are there any heroes here?
Gloria Dolan
gloriadolan151@gmail.com
LikeLike
If you had never heard of Charlie Kirk until 4 days ago, how have you formed such a strong opinion of him? There are hours upon hours of content to watch & read. Have you formed your opinion based upon social media posts, 1 min video clips, rage bait headlines? As Catholics it is not our job to judge, to hate, to label. We are to pray for those that we think are being led astray. Charlie Kirk welcomed all to have open, honest discussions. He never showed hate towards people. He beliefs are biblical, which say wives are to submit to their husbands so he was not saying anything that the Bible does not say.
If you do not have children then you cannot understand that as parents we instill our values into our children, we love them, educate them, attend mass, teach them right from wrong. Eventually our children grow up and become adults and make their own choices, the best we can do is pray that what we have taught them will make them choose the right path. Yes, the shooter was raised in a conservative household. But he grew up, he was an adult with his own free will and sadly he chose the path of evil.
I implore you to watch his content with an open mind, you may still disagree with him and that is your right, but your opinion will be more credible and genuine without being influenced by others. We cannot continue as a nation going down the path were on, knowledge is power.
LikeLike
Gloria summed this up perfectly. Father Don, please, before you compare CK to the great minds of our past, please listen to the Charlie Kirk show. In no way was his speech engaging in civil discourse. Rather it incited hate, and spread racist, misogynistic and homophobic rhetoric. I do not agree with murdering our foes, or even our oppressors but please don’t hold him up as someone to emulate. House Speaker Melissa Hortman, her husband and beloved golden retriever were murdered in their home by a right wing fanatic. Senator John Hoffman and wife were also shot yet survived by the same maniac. Speaker Hortman was known for her ability to reach across the aisle, to work for families, to openly condemn the political vitriol we too often see from our current leadership. Yet we are being told to sanctify Kirk? He may have been a “Christian” but I haven’t seen anything Christ-like in his words or actions. Respectfully, please learn more before you write such things. And when you speak about not hating trump, don’t forget the hatred of Biden so great the haters broke through security to our nations capital injuring and killing people. Don’t forget the hatred of Obama that had “Christians” making effigies of him, hood wife and young daughters with a noose around each neck. This is not new. It’s just finally happening to the demographic that’s usually pulling the trigger.
LikeLike
to me the Jesus doctrine is one of love. Love is the lens thru which we need to focus ourwkrds and action.
Charlie would not be subject to assassination if love of others is the course of action.
I am reading Valerie Kaur, Sage Warrior, not to fin division but commonality. It is there in our soul if we seek it. The Sikh doctrine of being part of the One is compelling. I wish both Catholics and Christian would find the path to unity. Catholics preach a commitment to one apostolic catholic which without the commitment to invitation to our table. This does not seem to me to embody that commitment.
LikeLike
I wish more people didn’t know who Mr. Kirk was. We would be better off as a country. You are giving him too much credit. Mr. Kirk found a way to profit off hurtful opinions preying on young people’s minds. Using the cloak of evangelical Christianity. No difference then Rush Limbaugh preying on ignorant Americans. I wished no ill will towards him, but I also will not glorify him as well.
LikeLike
Great read Fr. Don…I pray we can get back as a nation respecting other’s opinions, even the ones we don’t agree with…it’s long overdue! I also pray that people take the time to do their own deep dive research as opposed to basing opinions on headlines or short clips on social media. Again, you may not agree with what someone else is saying but you at least have the power of knowledge to form your own opinions as opposed to agreeing with one “side” or the other.
LikeLike
Thank you for discussing Charlie Kirk in your entry today. I was disappointed that at
4:30 Mass that I attended today, he was not even mentioned. I, too did not know of
him until about three weeks ago, a friend’s son brought him up in conversation. I do
believe he grabbed the youth of today’s attention, enabling them to consider going to
church, for which I am thankful!
LikeLike
Never in my Catholic life have I heard someone express their love of Christ more eloquently than Charlie Kirk. Non-judgemental and compassionate. People that are critical of him because of his political biases are missing an opportunity to witness faith in action. RIP
LikeLike
He was definitely judgmental.
LikeLike
Fr. Don, boy did you stir up a hornets nest. I also never heard of Charlie Kirk before his death but since have been shocked to find his popularity with college and high school and, I’m sure, possibly grade school students. I understand you were trying to relate his “learning style” to others, but I think you should have researched Kirk’s philosophy before writing. I am no scholar and ask you the following: Did Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Jesus, Augustine, Aquinas, Ignatius and others like them spew the hate, bigotry, racism, sexism and more that Kirk advocated? History is full of individuals that did the same.
Joe Magerl
LikeLike
Very eloquent take, Fr. Don. Some of the commenters here clearly did not absorb the message and have bought into what the mass media tells them to believe. Kirk was in no way a “white supremacist,” “misogynistic” or “homophobic.” For those who truly believe that, they have not watched enough of Kirk’s debates with college students, or their definition of what makes someone hateful is way off base. There is nothing hateful about standing for what you believe in and fostering civil dialogue about differences.
This isn’t a Republican or Democrat thing. This is about right and wrong. About those with morals and without them. This is about the future of our great country. I fear adults are too far gone. It’s evident right here in some of these comments. The fact that people who call themselves Christians have celebrated his assassination online and that so many teachers – those tasked with shepherding our children – have celebrated, is reprehensible. That is why Kirk was doing what he was doing, and his message will only get stronger from here.
The next generation will save us. Have any of you truly stopped to wonder why Kirk resonated with so many of them? “Respectfully, please learn more before you write such things.”
LikeLike
Many characteristics of Jesus? I don’t think so. Evidently you still don’t know who Charlie Kirk is.
Maureen Hardy
LikeLike
May I suggest that we all take a moment and think of the past weeks events in light of the readings we just heard on 9/14, The Exhaultaion of the Cross.
In the book of Numbers we find that God uses the same “image/instrument” of the serpent that “bit/tormented” the people as a means of healing when he directs Moses to mount the broze serpent on the pole and that when the people look at it they are healed.
So to if we are to move closer to the kingdom of God we too must “look at the thing” that is harming us, dividing us, and use that as the “encounter with God” to release our pain and fear. It’s only then that we can move forward each person only in able to change themselves and together moving forward. If we truly believe all people are created in the “image and likeness of God” then we must respect that truth first for ourselves and then for others, regardless of where the fall on any divisive specturm we create–politices, race, religion, gender–all of them.
So to does Jesus do the same for us with the cross, how this symbol of death where criminals were exectued, has become the image of our salvation.
We all can do better, and must do better.
Matthew Hauschild
LikeLike
I understand the point you are trying to make here, but I don’t think anyone should be holding Charlie Kirk up as an exemplar of classic debate. His was not an intellectually curious inquiry but rather a perversion of the Socratic method designed to leave his opponents humilated with pre-determined talking points (and pre-determined conclusions), rhetorical strategies, convolution of logical fallacies, and, for his online viewers, crafty editing. In the classic models you are describing, the goal isn’t to annhilate your opponent – the goal is to mutually educate and pursue the highest form of truth. Charlie Kirk, like others of his ilk, had no interest in actually engaging anyone in debate, but rather in “performing” debate to make a point. He was not there to learn and certainly not to understand. If anyone who was a fan of his questions this, ask yourself this – did you ever see him concede an argument?
Speaking of logical fallacies, choosing someone with positions as polarizing as Charlie Kirk’s (not to mention, positions so far out of alignment with the majority of the parishioners at parishes you currently serve) is a bit of a red herring in that it is nothing more than a distraction from your correct assertion that we would be in a better place as a country if more of us would employ true intellectual curiosity and the rigors of scholarship to our public debate. We would certainly be better off if our leadership, including and perhaps most especially the president, would do so.
Marisa Malanowski
LikeLike
Charlie Kirk was dangerous. His charisma rallied the nation, particularly youth, to ponder truth, but all acceptable conclusions were to be of his mindset and views of the world. He wasn’t interested in views other than his own and made many, many judgmental comments that raised red flags. In the end it wasn’t acceptable to ‘agree to disagree.’ As a former educator in a classical academy, his approach was in direct contrast to a true classical teaching process. Sadly, classical academies sometimes attract instructors with the same approach, painfully dividing communities rather than celebrating diversity.
Regardless, his death is senseless and prayers must abound for his family and killer.
Cynthia Tomes
LikeLike
When I first read your blog, I thought this had to be a joke. Comparing Kirk to those scholars and Jesus is nonsense. He was polar opposite of what Jesus taught but may have used the same tactics. Comparing him to James Jones and Jonestown would be a better fit, a cult leader that surrounds himself with Bible verses taken out of context, and spewing hatred for anyone that does not believe. An extreme racist, particularly against black women, and much the white Christian nationalist.
No one should be murdered for voicing their opinions. But, also not made a martyr for their extremism and a political cause. As we’re seeing, our current administration is attempting to cancel everyone that does not think as they do, agree with their policies, or speak out … no more 1st Amendment rights for opposition.
I guess we can compare Jesus in this line, spoke out against injustice and hatred, but share his love for everyone, even his persecutors.
LikeLike
Fr. Don,
I am dismayed to read these words from you. You seem to be completely ignoring the content of this man’s message which was filled hate and divisive statements about others.
To place his name in the same category as Martin Luther King or Robert Kennedy is a travesty.
I feel that you have gone astray and are not showing yourself to be the person I thought you to be.
If your intent was to improve the “conversation”, this message, sadly has the opposite effect.
Bill Craig
LikeLike
I would like to voice my support for those who called out Kirk’s hateful rhetoric. Like many commenters, my entire family is distraught about what’s happening in our country, and we pray for an end to actions and speech that continue to divide us.
Peggy Sachs
LikeLike