Video Transcript
Edmund Mitchell: Hi, everyone. Welcome back to The Real and True Podcast. I am one of your hosts, Edmund Mitchell, and today we have a really great episode on the Fifth Commandment. And we are talking with Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy, who is the executive director of the Catholic Mobilizing Network. If you’re not familiar with CMN, it is an organization that promotes the value of life over death to end the use of the death penalty to transform the U.S. criminal justice system and build capacity in society to engage in restorative practices, which we’ll talk about a little bit. But Krisanne is very talented. She’s been working in faith-based advocacy for the last 30 years. She’s an author, a mother of three, and has led CMN for the last seven years, and we’re really excited for her to be joining us. So, Krisanne, thank you so much for being here.
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: Thanks, Edmund. Good to be here.
Edmund Mitchell: I’m very excited for this conversation. I think people who are listening who are tasked with teaching the Commandments or just in evangelization and some of these different social justice issues come up, I think they’ll be interested in hearing your perspective. CMN works with the USCCB, and there’s also this Congregation of St. Joseph Mission Network, but CMN in particular has a huge focus on advocacy around the death penalty and respect for life. I don’t know if you have the same experience, but I can imagine someone sitting in class or hearing someone talk about the Commandments and of all the ones that they’re worried about, I think there’s a lot of people that—at least this was my experience—”Oh, you shall not murder? Easy! I’ll never do that one. I’ll never have to think of that Commandment again. I’ll probably never be tempted to do that. So I don’t have to worry or think about the Fifth Commandment ever again.”
But there really are a lot of practical implications. So I don’t know if there’s a question in that, but I just wanted to set the stage. I think a lot of people in the pews just kind of think, “Well, this Fifth Commandment doesn’t require anything of me.” And I love that this organization that you’re leading really helps raise awareness about the requirements that we have as Catholics to fight for the dignity of life.
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: Right? Yeah, there’s a lot to it.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. So, maybe you can walk us through how did you get into faith-based advocacy? What is your story and how did you come to be leading this organization and be so passionate about this?
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: Well, I think it’s honestly God-inspired. I would say that I originally started working in faith-based advocacy because I felt like there was a mission in the world. God was on the move, and I wanted to be part of that work. From a very young age, my parents got the Maryknoll magazine. It was just a small magazine that arrived every month, and it showed missioners out all over the world doing kind of the work of God: accompanying people, and standing up for human rights, and being with those who are suffering and in need. And I just thought, “Yeah, that’s the real essence of the Church. That’s the Church on the move and a live church.” And I wanted to be part of it.
So I did faith-based service after college and very much felt like this is something that I wanted to do for the rest of my life. So I came to Washington to work on root causes of poverty. I was first working on Latin America and human rights work. I did that for a few years and then realized that in order to do this truly from a place of faith, maybe I should get my Master’s. So I went and got my Master’s in theology knowing that I would return back to doing policy advocacy. And for many years worked both on Latin America, and then I worked on hunger and global development—both from a very much mission orientation—and worked in ecumenical circles as a Catholic for many years. But getting into the death penalty didn’t happen until I was in my late forties.
In my twenties, I saw the movie Dead Man Walking. I don’t know if you have seen it, and perhaps others. It’s a movie; it’s a book. Sister Helen Prejean. She’s a sister who is from Louisiana, and she ends up ministering to somebody on Death Row. She didn’t want to do it at first. She didn’t really know what she was getting into and then found herself over her head. But she had a really up close and personal experience of walking with someone who was on Death Row as their chaplain. And through her conversion on this issue; through the human stories of the people sitting on Death Row; through the victims who were harmed; through their families, it was a really incredible story. I saw it in my early twenties and just thought “If I could ever work on that issue, I would love to do that.”
And I didn’t seek it out; life led into way. But in 2015, Pope Francis came to the U.S. And I was working at an organization on hunger, but we were very much focused on the Holy Father’s visit. So I was at the White House when he arrived, I heard him speak before Congress, like many, many people did. And he talked about ending the death penalty. And it harkened back to me being in my twenties and seeing that movie and being so convicted about this issue. And I thought, “Oh my gosh, it’s really still alive for me.” When he talked about ending the death penalty, I stood in tears. I just thought it was so compelling to hear that in front of the U.S. Congress, knowing that the U.S. government and states around the country have the death penalty, and it’s a stain on the nation, and it’s something that is anti-life.
So fast forward a couple years later, the founder of Catholic Mobilizing sought me out and said, “I’ve been watching your career, and I’d love to have you lead the next iteration of this organization.” She founded the organization, but then was looking for someone to kind of take it to its next chapter. So I felt very blessed to be invited to do just that. So I would say it was faith-leading, and I’m glad that God didn’t want me to do it any sooner because it’s not for the faint hearted. But I feel called to this work now, and I’m glad to be part of it.
Edmund Mitchell: Man, that’s an amazing story. I feel like it’s making me think of how there can be things in our life that we don’t examine; we just take for granted that that’s how the world is. And I can imagine people spending most of their life in maybe one of three camps. There’s people that grow up and hear of the death penalty, and maybe some people’s moral intuition is, “Oh, that makes sense that this should exist for people that commit really serious crimes.” And then maybe you have people whose moral intuition as they’re growing up is, “Yeah, this exists. And it seems kind of wrong, and it bothers me.” And then maybe a third camp in the middle where it’s like, “I know this is a thing. I haven’t examined it too much. And this just seems to be something.”
And it’s beautiful how often the Gospel makes us kind of confront things that we haven’t examined, or things that we just take for granted. And I love people like yourself, and like Pope Francis, who dream of a world where these things we just take for granted could be different. Could we imagine a society, a world, where the death penalty doesn’t exist? So I wonder, for someone who hasn’t spent much time thinking about the death penalty, could you give people just a real quick understanding? How do we understand or make sense of the fact that the death penalty is even a thing that people do in the world and still do? For someone who just hasn’t spent much time thinking about; just has kind of grown up maybe in the U.S. or another country where it exists and that’s just something you just kind of try to maybe wrap your head around or maybe avoid thinking about. How do we make sense of the fact that this is something that people do and have done?
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: Yeah. Thank you for that. I do think the part of my story where something penetrated my heart in the movie Dead Man Walking; something penetrated my heart when I heard the Holy Father talk about the death penalty years and years later. I would just invite the listeners to imagine for a second if they haven’t been moved about the death penalty to really ponder it. Because when you think about being contrary to the Gospel, I don’t think it can get more obvious than this. I do want folks to know, if they haven’t had a chance to think about it, we say, “Well, it’s just something that happens in the world.” The truth is, most of the world has already determined that this practice is illegal or immoral and shouldn’t happen. 70% of the world does not have the death penalty.
Edmund Mitchell: Oh my gosh. I would not have guessed that. I’m so dumb. For some reason, it just feels like I probably am susceptible to this lie that “Oh, the rest of the world is somehow unenlightened and we’re this great enlightened country. And so if we have it, there must be tons of other countries that still have this.”
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: No, I’m glad to share that information because it’s true. My European friends; they’re like, “You all still have the death penalty?” In the European Union, you can’t be part of the EU if you have the death penalty. So none of the EU countries have it. None of Latin America has it. So in terms of the U.S., our strange bedfellows on this issue are Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Russia. That’s who we’re keeping company with this practice of capital punishment. So I just want to put that out there. I think that’s an enormous kind of level-setting that needs to happen. In terms of the United States, about half of the states have the death penalty. The other half have already repealed it; taken it off the books and their state laws.
The federal government still has the death penalty. There are 40 men—and it is all men—on the federal Death Row. And then about half of the states have the death penalty in the U.S. In terms of why we still have it in this country, you have to look back at the founding of the country and sort of our slavery past and Jim Crow segregation. There were lynchings that were happening in those days, and that was explicitly or implicitly authorized by the state. And when that fell out of favor; when lynchings fell out of favor, what took its place was this more formalized system of punishment; of killing someone, which was capital punishment. So it definitely has this past of racial terror as well. So I don’t think this country can kind of move away from that past. Why I think we still have it today, whereas half of the states don’t have it. Where we do have it, or even in our hearts, where people are like, “Well, I think we should still have it.” I think there’s a couple things that are operating. One is, I think people think that the death penalty deters crime, and that’s completely erroneous. I think that people think, “Well, it said it in Scripture, “an eye for an eye.” But that was Old Testament. And that was about actually creating a minimum. You didn’t want to have any more harm than the harm that was caused. It was to create this kind of guidance. That was sort of the Leviticus law. And then when Jesus came, in Matthew, we see the Sermon of the Mount Him talking about “But I say to you. You’ve heard it said “an eye for an eye,” but I say to you.”
So He flipped the script on it and said no one should be taking retaliation. And so when you think about what we’ve been kind of addicted to, almost the myths of this, I think people in casual conversation will say “Victim families, they deserve closure. They deserve healing.” The truth is, that’s a bill of goods. Victim families get re-traumatized by having these long, drawn-out court cases and trials, and then wait 20, 30, 35 or more years so that someone’s actually executed. And then they realize, “I waited all this time. This didn’t bring me that closure.” So I just think that there’s kind of operational myths that are behind the scenes in subterranean as to why we’re kind of still addicted to capital punishment in this country, and why we haven’t finally gotten rid of it once and for all.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. I think that’s a really good point. I think the kind of temptation or allure of retaliation that “Someone has hurt me in a certain way, so I want to hurt them in the same way,” or “I want to take something from them.” We should have a sense of justice; a sense of “Something wrong was done, and there needs to be a sense of justice.” But there’s this allure of this false sense of like, “This will fix how I’m feeling. This will change and make the wrong easier to stand if we do something really grave to the person who perpetrated something like this.”
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: I do want to say that I do think we have to really reckon with vengeance and retribution. I do think exactly what you’re saying when something really bad happens, we don’t have the scaffolding to handle that anger, that grief, that deep sadness, that outrage; that holy outrage about when bad things happen. We don’t have the scaffolding to kind of mitigate that; how to deal with that without just wanting to push back and do something equally bad, equally harmful. And absolutely we need to call for accountability, but at the same time, we don’t need to walk on someone’s dignity. We don’t need to devalue someone else. I just don’t think that’s what God intended. Do I think that we need to seek right relationship, we need to seek repair, we need to try to create a path toward reconciliation? For sure. But simply spewing out more violence and perpetuating a cycle of violence, I don’t think it’s God’s intention.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. I’m so grateful to be working on this project; on Real and True, because even after 10 or 12 years of working in church ministry, teaching the faith, really taking time to reflect on these thingsI kind of am like, “Man, I should have focused more on this.” So many people might hear in some sermon or in a catechesis or RCIA, they’ll hear the Commandments; they’ll hear, “Thou shall not kill,” and they’ll just think of their own situation. They won’t think about this call we have to stand up against the death penalty. But reflecting on this and researching the organization that you’re a part of, it’s like, “Man, this really is a big thing to wrestle with and to take the time to feel and put ourselves in the headspace of really coming to reckon with the death penalty.” You’ve shared some things that I think people would be surprised about—I know I’m surprised about—but I wonder if there’s anything else that most people don’t know about the death penalty? I know one of the things was some of the collateral effects on people that are involved. But yeah, are there other things that you come across when you’re talking to people where you’re just kind of like, “Man, most people don’t know this about the death penalty?”
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: One of the first things when I started working on this issue, I remember, that so struck me and still does today: the death notice after an execution. So when a man or woman has been executed, typically now by lethal injection or lethal gas—as we’re moving in that direction—the death certificate says homicide.
Edmund Mitchell: Oh wow.
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: So if there’s any question about the violence that we’re perpetuating, I think that is proof positive. Other things about the death penalty I don’t think people understand is that there’s so many people on Death Row that should have never gotten a death sentence. Period. We talk about this modern-day system of capital punishment since the seventies; the early seventies. And since that time, since 1973, 197 people who were sitting on Death Row—prisoners on Death Row, if you will—197 of them have been exonerated, which meant they should have never been there in the first place. So when you think of all these people that are potentially innocent that are even currently on Death Row now, it’s such a broken system. And even if it was not broken, we’d still be against it. Because it’s so anti-life. It’s so contrary to human dignity.
But I don’t think people understand these stories are so common about people who are on Death Row who shouldn’t be there; who are innocent. I don’t know if your listeners would have read the book or seen the movie Just Mercy. Michael B. Jordan was in it—a number of A-Star-level acting. But Just Mercy. And it shows the story of a man in Alabama who—it’s true story—who was innocent. Brian Stevenson, he’s a pretty well-known death penalty lawyer, ended up getting him off of Death Row. But the backstory about who receives capital punishment, it’s often people that don’t have good attorneys. It’s often people who are in poverty. They say “if you have the capital, you don’t get the punishment.” There’s such geographic disparity; there’s such racial disparity. It’s not a deterrent to crime. There’s so many myths about the death penalty that people don’t know.
If they allowed emotions about wrongdoing to move them toward being a proponent of the death penalty, I would just invite folks to kind of look on the other side of that coin, because I think the underbelly to the system of capital punishment needs to show because I think it speaks for itself that it needs to be gone in this country.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. You would think all it should take is one person to be wrongly executed, or even the close call of almost wrongly executing someone, you would think would be enough to be like, “We can’t do that. That’s such a serious mistake. Such a grave thing to do.” I know that there are going to be a portion of people that are familiar with the revision to the paragraph on the death penalty and the Catechism. So for people who aren’t super familiar, the Catechism we have today was published in 1992. The previous Catechism that we had was in the 1500s. And it doesn’t mean that the Church teaching changed, it’s just the way that the Church wrote down and expressed explicitly the Church teaching.
There’s just different ways you say that in the 1990s compared to the 1500s. And then 26 years after the publication of the Catechism, Pope Francis issued a revision to a few places, but one in particular was paragraph 2267 on the death penalty. Could you maybe just give people a rundown of that revision and how to understand that? I think people who are a little newer to the faith, to them, might come across as, “Oh, the Church changed its teaching.” I think sometimes that was the headline or what I heard people say, “Oh, the Church changed its teaching on this.” But maybe you could just help people kind of understand that and unpack it.
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: Yeah. The way I look at it, certainly in 2018 when this clarification was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, it seemed to me to bridge all of these pieces that had been evolving for quite some time. So in ’92, in this kind of more modern-day Catechism, there was the idea that the state did have the right to take a life for male actors or. And John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae, by ’95, was already saying, “Wait a minute. Actually, it should be used very sparingly. It is rare, and its relevance is practically non-existent. We shouldn’t use it very often at all.” So he was sort of pulling back and saying, “Maybe the state has the right to do that, but we should really never use that.”
And so when John Paul II came here; he came in ’99 to St. Louis, and there was a man on Death Row, and he was awaiting execution. And Pope John Paul went to the governor and appealed for his clemency. And the governor heeded his request. He was already fighting for lives. Further on into his papacy, he was again calling the death penalty cruel and unnecessary. And then you get to Pope Benedict the 16th, and he was reiterating that. Then you get to Pope Francis; he was talking about it being contrary to human dignity. He was talking about moving towards that we should abolish it all together. And in 2018, when that clarification came down, there was a really thoughtful background.
The exact statement was that the Church teaches that the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the human person. And she, the Church, works with determination for abolition worldwide. So that’s where we arrived in 2018 with the revision. But truthfully, it was like a clarification all the way through. And the background description was saying, what has not changed, is the dignity of the human person. We’ve always known that. Our understanding of how to keep society safe has changed. Society has changed in this front. It’s no longer that you have to take someone’s life in order to protect other citizens or protect the common good. As society had been evolving on that front, and that clarity came into focus, the Church was saying, “Wait a minute.We really can protect others’ dignity without taking the life, and we’re going to move in that direction.”
It was hard for the Church to take that leap, but at the same time, I’m so glad it did. Now, there’s no exceptions. There’s no exclusion. It’s so crystal clear. And I think for many years, people in the pews, faithful Catholics, were saying, “Oh boy, the death penalty is for the worst of the worst.” But the truth is, how do we determine who’s the worst of the worst? Because the way I understand it—and from following many death penalty cases very closely—I can tell you the rate of innocence, the rate of wrong conviction, etc. There’s so much to contend with. How can we sit in the pews and say, “Oh, but that’s the worst of the worst.” We can certainly react when grave harm has been done. But I think now we don’t feel the pressure to be like, “Well, who’s the worst of the worst?” We don’t take life. God takes the life. We don’t take life.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. And correct me if I’m explaining this wrong, but the way I’m understanding is it seems like—people in circles where I’ve heard conversations about this—it seems like people wrongly sometimes assume that, “Oh, the death penalty might be allowed by Church teaching as a punishment” and not understanding what you just said, which is the fact that this door was even open at all was just to try to explain how you can justify taking someone’s life as an act of self-defense. There’s “You Shall not murder.” That doesn’t mean that if someone’s trying to kill you, and you defend yourself with lethal force, that you’re a murderer. And so it’s trying to navigate that. You can imagine a world where someone kills someone, you put them in jail, they break out, they kill someone again, you put them in jail. They just keep causing havoc on society. You can imagine some small village or city where there’s this defensive action that has to be taken where it’s like “We need to defend ourselves from you.” But yeah, it is very hard to imagine that being the case in America or
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: Today. Period.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. Or today at all. Anywhere that you would have to take someone’s life because you’re afraid they’re going to somehow get back out and continue killing people. So I do wonder about this one line in here because I think you talking about this will help people kind of wrap their heads around this. There’s like this final line in paragraph 2267 where it says, “More effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens, but at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.” Which I think is really beautiful that it’s in there. It’s saying, “We can’t deprive this person—no matter how grave the sin is—we can’t deprive them the possibility of redemption at some point. We can’t ever give up hope on this person, or take away the possibility that at some point in their life, they might be sorry for this.”
And I feel so drawn to that line. So then I’m thinking that someone might say to me, “Well, but that person deprived another life of the possibility of living out the rest of their life working out their redemption.” So I was just wondering what you would say because I didn’t know how exactly to respond to that. Because it seems very beautiful to always hope, no matter the crime and sin, to always be open that this person might at some point in their life—that’s between them and God, whether or not—at some point they seek forgiveness. But what would you say to someone that’s like, “Well, but that person stole that from the person they killed?”
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: In Scripture, I think of Paul. And I think of how scared the apostles were of Paul when he had his conversion. They were like, “No, he’s been killing us. He’s been our worst enemy.” And yet God was saying, “No, he has been converted. He’s gonna work for the faith now.” Can you believe that?
Edmund Mitchell: That’s crazy.
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: We’re talking about God’s abundant mercy. If we have a hard time wrapping our head around it, it’s because it’s that generous. It’s that abundant. I don’t know how else to say it. I think when, in John 10:10, “I came so that they may have life and have it to the full,” we’re talking about full measure. That is the level and the measure of abundant mercy that we’re talking about. It’s hard for us to fathom that, but that’s what God’s talking about. So, yes. Tragedies, grave harm, accountability, mourning for people who have been lost. But can you imagine for people who have committed or suffered grave harm, there could be that window of possibility for, for redemption? I think it’s a Christian story.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. I’m reminded. I’m sure this has been played out in lots of movies—and I can’t place what movie—but you can imagine the scene where finally, at the end of the movie, the good guy has the opportunity to exact revenge and justice against the bad guy. And there’s this sense of “This stops with me. I don’t want to perpetuate the sin and the evil. This stops with me.” And that’s kind of in a way the Gospel message. God had every right to enact all of this justice for the grave sin. And He says, “No, this stops with me. I can choose to have this evil stop.”
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: It was just a reading this past week too about when some of the apostles were imprisoned and they were chained, and there was an earthquake that comes and the prison guard fell asleep. And was only woken to realize that the earthquake had unearthed the chains and the bondage. Right. And the apostles were still there. They didn’t go anywhere. And he jumped out to kill himself. And they’re like “No! We’re still here.” And so they, and the prison guard, was changed because of it. He said, “Well, then come into my house and have a meal with my family.” The course of history changes there. That’s what we’re talking about.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. That’s amazing. The faith makes sense, but there’s a way in which the Gospel turns everything on its head. In a way it doesn’t make sense. The way I love my kids doesn’t make…I love them so much. And it’s reasonable, but there’s a sense to it where it’s like, “How could you possibly choose this kind of thing?” And that’s what the Gospel calls us to. And I think talking about the death penalty and reflecting on it kind of brings to light that radical and kind of—not that it’s not common sense—but this counterintuitive or counter-worldly way of looking at how to make things right and how to do good and love.
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: When the revision of the Catechism was made, the 10 paragraphs that followed it—not within the Catechism, but when the CDF shared that document and said “We’re revising in this way”—the 10 paragraphs start off by saying, “In light of the gospel, we’re doing this.” The Gospel’s calling us as something greater to this measure of society to understanding how society has developed and the degree of dignity that we’re speaking of here.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. That’s amazing. I could talk about this for a while. I just want to acknowledge out loud that even in this conversation, this stirring in my soul about this issue and about how even if there were a world where standing up against the death penalty never had an impact on the law being changed, I can already—just in a short conversation—feel the change it has on me of having the right attitude towards it and the way it’s calling me out and this faith and confidence and the way it changes our kind of relationship to each other in life. So I’m so thankful for the work that you’re doing, and thank you so much for this. We’re kind of running out of time, but are there any other things that you want to point people in the direction of or anything else that we didn’t touch on? I think I just got so focused. I think I just got so focused on the parts of this that were really resonating with me that I just want to make sure that if there’s anything we didn’t get to talk about that you had an opportunity to.
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: There are sticky points, you know? And so I think we spent a lot of time in the real wrestling, and so I’m grateful for that. What I do want to share is you can find us on the web, catholicmobilizing.org. In addition to trying to dismantle the system of death; capital punishment, we’re also about creating and building up a culture of life and to do it the way that we are engaged in it is to build restorative justice. So we’re about advancing healing and advancing justice and ending the death penalty. But we are trying to give practical tools and practices for Catholics to think about how they can build a culture of life with how they respond to harm and crime. And for pastors, for ministers, for church leaders, for lay folks who are just really serious about their faith, I think our website and our materials can help build that scaffolding of how we can respond to harm and crime in ways that are life giving, that lead to the possibility of maybe forgiveness, of reconciliation, of repair; asking different questions than “What crime has happened, and who do I punish?” But “What harm has happened and how do we address the harm? Who are the victims and how do we address their needs? How do we go about making it right or to the greatest degree that we can make it?”
I think as Catholics, we can have a posture of restoration and repair because that’s what Scripture has called us to; that’s what Catholic social teaching calls us to. But you have to kind of learn how to do it and unlearn some things, like those myths that I was talking about.
So I think catholicmobilizing.org. There’s lots of resources, videos, we’ve teamed up with the Vatican and others, murder victim family members, that kind of shed light on all aspects of what I’ve been talking about today. So there’s that. The other piece is on the death penalty. There are states that are executing individuals right now. So I think I would challenge your listeners to understand are they living in the death penalty state? What does that look like? And is there anyone facing imminent execution? I can tell you that in the state of Alabama, there was a man who was executed in January, first time ever in the United States, by lethal gas. So we’re moving in that direction when it comes to capital punishment. Department of Corrections, we’re having a hard time getting drugs because we’ve done a really good job of pressing pharmaceutical companies to not sell their drugs to kill people. Department of Corrections were looking for ways to kill people who were facing execution. And they’ve now turned to nitrogen hypoxia. So there are really ghastly things that are happening in this country, in the state of Alabama, other states and I would just invite folks to think about, learn about and get engaged in trying to call governors, write letters; really use their faith as a springboard to stand up for life in this way.
Edmund Mitchell: Yeah. There’s an area on the site where it has a list of everyone currently on Death Row and their images and I think also by state or just the number of people by state. Even if you’re pro death penalty, it’s hard to see how real that is and the number of people that are on Death Row. I think it helps make it a little more real and not just an idea to talk about lightly.
Krisanne Vaillancourt-Murphy: Yeah.
Edmund Mitchell: Well, Krisanne, thank you so much for the work you’re doing and the work that Catholic Mobilizing Network is doing. Also, some other practicals, like you mentioned, books and movies, and I think those things are really great ways to make this a little more concrete and real for people. So I encourage people to check those things out. Thank you, Krisanne. And for everyone listening, please feel free to drop comments below if you’re watching this or listening. And be sure to subscribe anywhere you enjoy podcasts. You can also visit realtrue.org to watch or listen to all the other units that go along with this podcast. We have three different videos that kind of unpack the Fifth Commandment. And as always, our mission with Real and True is to unlock the beauty and truth of the Catechism and help people around the world encounter its pulsating heart, which is Jesus Christ. So we will see you in the next episode.