----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 9:34 AM Subject: Re: Peaceful change
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:49:18 -0500, Dan Minette wrote > > > It is nationalistic idolatry. We are not the good. > > > > Actually, that's not what Bush is saying. > > But right below, you say he *is* saying it, don't you? > > > ...what > > one does to bad guys is OK because we know who are the good guys and > > the bad guys. > > Perhaps you don't see it as nationalistic because he allows for the existence > of "good guys" who aren't Americans. But the definition of a good guy is > anybody who agrees with our national policies. Actually, the definition of a good guy is anyone who wants to live in peace and freedom and would be willing to let his neighbor do the same. That's not really that bad of a definition. >Everybody else is working against us, for the forces of evil. He is too sure that he has a l > > I sincerely think > > that Bush thinks God's will for the world is a prosperous world > > filled with people living in peace and freedom everywhere. > > I can't see that, since he seems to clearly want some people dead, by which I > mean he seeks peace at the barrel of a gun. Actually, the line was captured dead or alive. I think that he would be willing to wipe out AQ to stop them. The reality of the situation is that, because we are not powerful enough to always stop violent actions without resorting to violence ourselves. The classic example of this is Bohnhoffer. He was reputed to have such a strong sense of the spiritual, that he was able to turn the hearts of the SS guards who were guarding him and was able to engage in spiritual dialog with them. Yet, he felt that _he_ had to resort to violence to stop Hitler. If someone who wrote one of the greatest books on discipleship in the 20th century, and wrote a confessions that placed Jesus clearly at the center of the church and our lives over nationalism (Theological Declaration of Barmen) felt that he had to seek peace at the barrel of the gun, I don't see how we can automatically declare all such views evidence of bad theology. >I see an enormous conflict > between "wipe out the evil-doers" and "blessed are the peacemakers." There is, indeed, > > If we are only faithful, God will ensure that we will succeed. I > > don't think this is sound. > > There was no such hubris in the six-point plan -- it was based on faith, not > might. But, it was faith in human institutions. It was faith in the power of human law. By doing things the right we, we somehow evoke God's power and everything turns out for the best. But, in a world where theological understanding about the consequences of war and inaction in the face of dictators must be informed by the Holocaust, we cannot count on God to intervene because we eschew violence ourselves. That doesn't mean that pacifism is wrong, it means that pacifism must adress the millions who died when they could have been saved by actions that killed thousands. To borrow JDG's example of something that is intrinsically wrong, if he refused to condemn an innocent man to save a nation, he would have to adress the loss of the nation. This doesn't make him wrong, indeed I have sympathy for that position; it merely makes him adress the moral question at hand instead of arm wave around it. My guess is that JDG would be willing to accept such a requirement, and talk about why it was wrong to condemn an innocent man to save lives. >Nobody was selling it as a guaranteed solution; it was a faith-based > initiative. No, but it was sold as a plausible alternative. There is no evidence that it was. How does it differ from the actions at my church that I described? Finally, let me better explain how I draw the line between two cases. Faith and Hope is believing that God was with the Jews in the concentration camp, that he never abandoned them, even though they suffered and died. Magical thinking is believing that, if we only hold true to pacifism, God will intervene to change the hearts of the Nazis, thus avoiding the Holocaust. I used the word magical thinking as a means of expressing the belief that we can somehow control/direct God's actions in the world. Believing in God being with us and working in God's time and God's way, without it being expressed in terms of the things of this world stands in opposition to magical thinking. This is what I associate with hope and faith. The problem we have is discerning how we are called. In my opinion, Bush and the folks behind the 6-points make very similar discernment mistakes. It is certainly not my position to determine if either sinned. But, as a fellow Christian, I am called to offer my own discernment and to engage in the very human political process of developing the communities discernment. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
