Category Archives: Military

Moral legacy of war

11 Replies

There’s an interesting book that’s being written, called “The Moral Legacy of World War II.” It’s being written by Ted Grimsrud, who teaches theology and peace studies at Eastern Mennonite University in Harrisonburg, VA. He is posting rough drafts of each chapter on the web. You can see the table of contents here, with links to the chapters that have been made public.

It’s an interesting topic. While the impact of the war on society as a whole is interesting, I’m particularly aware of the impact on the church in the United States. Our fellowship, the churches of Christ, transformed almost overnight from a predominantly pacifistic movement to a movement that broadly supports military involvement.

I overstated my case the other day by saying that this country has basically been at war for the last 70 years. Nick rightly corrected me on this. If you want to get technical, the last declaration of war by the United States Congress was in 1942, when the U.S. declared war on Romania. What may have seemed like wars since then have merely been military actions. What is unquestionable, however, is that the U.S. geared up militarily in the 1940s and never “geared down” after that. We became, and remain, a militarized society. And our churches, the churches of Christ at least, became and remain a militarized religious movement.

So Grimsrud’s study should be interesting. I’ve only read the first chapter. I hope some of you will read his writings and comment on them. His bias is obvious, which can often be helpful. Studies done under a pretense of objectivity can be deceiving. Every story has a slant, and it’s useful to know ahead of time what that slant is going to be.

Deadly mirage

13 Replies

It came out in a paper in the U.K. last month. I didn’t see much coverage here, but I thought the news to be rather significant. Let me quote a couple of paragraphs from the article:

Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, codenamed Curveball by German and American intelligence officials who dealt with his claims, has told the Guardian that he fabricated tales of mobile bioweapons trucks and clandestine factories in an attempt to bring down the Saddam Hussein regime, from which he had fled in 1995.

“Maybe I was right, maybe I was not right,” he said. “They gave me this chance. I had the chance to fabricate something to topple the regime. I and my sons are proud of that and we are proud that we were the reason to give Iraq the margin of democracy.”

How many times will history have to repeat itself before we are convinced? When humans go to war, we don’t have all the facts. The citizens, those called upon to lay down their lives, don’t have all the facts. In this case, even those calling for war didn’t have the correct information.

I continue to marvel that people who complain about putting their tax dollars in the hands of the government seem so willing to put the lives of their sons and daughters in the very same hands. We don’t trust them with our money, but we trust them with our children.

Even when time and time again we find out that what we thought we knew about the reasons for fighting turns out to be a mirage. A deadly mirage.

Wars are fought on lies and deceit. I for one want to have no part of it.

Good money after bad

3 Replies

$720 million a day. That’s what the American Friends Service Committee estimated as the cost of the Iraq war. That finding was published in September 2007; I doubt it’s exactly the same today. And we have to admit that the Quakers have an anti-war bias. But I don’t expect them to be grossly dishonest with numbers, even to support their views.

The Washington Post article that reported the finding stated, “The $720 million figure breaks down into $280 million a day from Iraq war supplementary funding bills passed by Congress, plus $440 million daily in incurred, but unpaid, long-term costs.”

Some accept that figure as the cost of “doing business” in the modern world.

Me, I can’t help but wish that Caesar put my tax dollars to better use.

Maybe the early Christians were right after all

14 Replies

Photo by Ove Tøpfer; from Stock Xchange

Excellent discussion yesterday. I’m always hoping for a little push back. That helps me sharpen my thinking and test my ideas.

I want to try and further explore yesterday’s topics, based on some of the discussion:

  1. There are real limitations to saying, “I don’t see _____ in the New Testament.” I do recognize that. But I expect what we do today to at least fall in line with what is in the Bible, to not run counter to the examples there (Francis Chan has an interesting video that talks about this). And if we feel the need to circumvent some biblical teaching, I’d like at least a hint that early Christians saw it the same way. There is a prohibition of eating certain things in Acts 15, yet we have several passages that seem to say that all foods are lawful for us. That’s the sort of thing I’m looking for.
  2. Our situation is different today, with Christians representing such a large percentage of the population of many nations. Does that change how we view God’s teachings? I’m asking as much as anything. I’m wrestling through that one. Here are some thoughts:
    1. As Christians, we are called to give primary loyalty to the Kingdom of God. Even as a Roman citizen, I don’t get a picture of Paul looking to promote the interests of Rome. If Christians come to “power” within a certain country, their actions should be guided not just by what is best for that country, but by what is best for the world in general. That would be a political nightmare here in the United States.
    2. As Christians, we are to live by Christian principles at all times. Imagine what that would look like in governing a country. When negotiating with other countries, we would look to serve them, trying to meet their needs. We would return all land that we have taken from other countries, be it through war, be it through intimidation. Wars would be limited, if not eliminated. There is no way a Christian nation would be in a constant state of war for 70 years.
    3. To some degree, our governments are set up to rival much of what God does. Like the men of Babel, humans today look to band together and make a name for themselves, looking to find in one another what they should be seeking from God. I’m still trying to work out in my head how Christians can effectively be a part of that. I haven’t figured it out.
    4. Even where our situation differs, our dependence on God can’t change. We can’t put our trust in horses and chariots. We need to find the courage to imitate the Christians in Acts 12, despite the scorn and ridicule of brothers who choose not to do so. We need to be willing to let nations rise and fall when necessary, to trust God even when He raises up an Assyria or a Babylon to do His will. We need to be willing to honor Caesar even when Caesar is evil. Honor, but not worship.

OK, them’s my thoughts. I’m sure today the good ideas will be in the comments, as they were yesterday.

Maybe the early Christians got it wrong

21 Replies

Photo by Ove Tøpfer; from Stock Xchange

I just don’t see it. I’ve read through the New Testament multiple times, and I just don’t see it. I don’t see any evidence of Christians using power, power as the world defines it, to shape their world. Yes, they used the power of the Spirit, the power of words, the power of prayer, etc. But where are the examples of the use of physical force, for example to advance the Kingdom or even to protect Kingdom followers? Where is the political maneuvering to achieve their goals?

“Well, there just weren’t enough of them.” Are you kidding me? If you haven’t done so, read the last post. God prefers to work with the minority.

“Well, maybe they did that, and we just don’t have record of it.” That’s possible, although it seems strange that something that has become such a central part of Christians’ lives today could have been so unimportant then that it wasn’t recorded.

Or am I missing the examples? I read Acts 12 and try to imagine how it would have played out today. James is arrested and killed. Peter is arrested. And the church is just praying and “singing Kumbayah” while Peter is in prison. That’s ridiculous. Storm the prison. Kill the guards. Free the Christians who are held unjustly. Set an example so that Christians in the 21st century will know what God expects of them.

Instead, they depended on God. Wimps. Weaklings. These are the people that one prominent brotherhood speaker says he has no use for. Pick up a sword and fight, you cowards. If God could use Samson and Gideon to win battles against extraordinary odds, He can help you defeat the evil Herod.

Or do you mean to tell me that with thousands of Christians in Jerusalem, they couldn’t take over the Sanhedrin? Or form a rival Sanhedrin to make just decisions? If they’d done that, rather than focus on prayer and the Word, we’d have the examples we need to know how to conduct ourselves.

What am I missing here? Some of you know the writings of the early church better than I. Maybe the church in the second and third century began to use the tools of the world in a way I’m not aware of.

Or do we seriously think that our lives should be so focused on power issues like war and politics when those things are absent from the early church? Does pragmatism trump spirituality?

Maybe you can convince me.