Posted on 03/22/2003 7:36:02 AM PST by Gamecock
Responses to Questions on Going to War
A worthy nation does not pursue war to end peace, but to establish or reestablish it.
1) Question: Do we spend enough time pondering the unintended consequences of war: the lingering hate that lasts for generations, the tyrants and tyrannical systems that often arise in the wake of war, the scars and wounds and memories that blight numberless families for decades?
Reply: Perhaps we don't spend time pondering the "unintended consequences of war" because history screams in our ear about the "unintended consequences of appeasement." Six million Jewish souls were the result of over pondering the risks of taking action against evil. That figure is only a fraction of the total number of those slaughtered by an appeased tyrant of the last century. Hate lasts for generations ultimately because there is sin in the world and in the hearts of men, not because some nobly rise up to resist the global ramifications of that sin.
Because a tyrant could "theoretically" come to power after a conflict is not a wise reason to sit idle when a tyrant brutally exists in "reality." The fact is that the longer people "ponder" this issue, the more Iraqis actually die every day. There are scars and wounds from war, but history records that they are often less painful than the scars and wounds that arise from thoughtful inaction resulting practically in appeasement of evil.
2) Question: Do we think enough about the children and the old people who suffer unspeakably when armies march? The young men and women--the flower of nations--who never return from war? (England lost 70,000 men and 170,000 wounded in three days of war in WWI, and, historian Paul Keegan writes, "[those days] marked the end of an age of vital optimism in British life that has never been recovered."
Reply: One could not even count the names of the young children and old men and women who died at the hands of Hitler, Milosevich, Pol Pot, Hussein and the scores of others like them. These appeased tyrants are what have cost the world "young men and women," not the wars which eventually occur when the world can no longer sit and ponder the consequences. Ask 10 young men if they would rather die fighting a vicious evil or die helplessly at the hands of an empowered vicious evil. Nine of them will fight and one will ponder the question.
The reality is that England would probably never have suffered the great loss that Keegan wrote about if their Prime Minister at the time, Neville Chamberlain, had possessed the foresight of Tony Blair. Had they chosen to resist evil before it grew strong, rather than appease it at a critical moment in history, England's loss of life would have been significantly reduced. History affirms that sometimes pondering whether we should pursue "peace in our time" is the most foolish of actions.
Note: When I first wrote this response, I misread the parenthetical note as a World War II reference. Upon review, I noted the World War I reference and believe MacDonald and his quote from John Keegan (not Paul) are referring to the Battle of the Somme. Overall, I believe my reply still addresses his basic questions above the parenthetical note and that the broader principle in my answer applies to the current situation.
3) Question: Do we ever think of those on the other side who worship the Lord Jesus, too? What does war do to our national soul?
Reply: Our own Civil War is a testimony to the fact that some times Christians are on both sides of a conflict. We should follow the command of Scripture and pray for our enemies regardless of their faith. That being said, it was right for Union soldiers to restore our nation and fight for the freedom of those oppressed by a tyrannical view of human equality. It is never right to acquiesce to evil even if somehow some Christians someway find themselves in the service of it.
Not opposing evil can and will do far more damage to a nation's soul than waging war against evil will. Reinhold Niebuhr made a significant point when he said, “Pacifism is a form of Christian heresy, for it requires the Christian to stand impotent in the face of evil." At this point, pondering this issue of war further will only facilitate impotence in the face of a very present and proven evil.
4) Question: Would our movement ever listen to Christian thinkers in other parts of the world on the subject of war ...especially those who have been through it?
Reply: What might be more important here is to ask what do those who suffered from Christian inaction during a time of war have to say? In March of 1998, the Vatican issued a statement from Pope John Paul II apologizing for the inaction of the Roman Catholic Church that many think enabled the holocaust in Europe under Hitler. Some thought the statement did not go far enough in holding Pope Pius XII responsible for what they believe was the inaction of the church.
Meir Lau, Israel's chief rabbi for Jews of European ancestry, had this to say in reference to the actions of the Pius XII: "One who does nothing to avoid the bloodshed is like a partner to the mass murder of human beings. He didn't do it, but he didn't stop it." Sometimes it is more important to know what others think of Christian action or inaction, than to understand what Christian thinkers might be thinking during their state of inactivity. To quote a Christian thinker of that time who died in concentration camp, Dietrich Boenhoffer, "Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility."
5) Question: How many preachers know how to open the Bible on the subject of the morality and the spiritual cost to nations at war, to make their people think ... and engage in intensive intercessory prayer?
Reply: MacDonald is correct that preachers should be able to articulately explain to their members when, as Ecclesiastes 3 states, there is "a time to kill and a time to heal" and "a time for war and a time for peace." It is understood in these verses that there are appropriate times for each activity, and therefore, a nation can and will suffer spiritual costs when it remains inactive at a time of moral and noble cause on the behalf of others.
6) Question: Does the concept of sanctity of life have any application to war issues?
Reply: Hans Morgenthau said that it is wrong to believe there is a distinct disassociation between war and peace. Rather, Morgenthau stated that there is a distinct connection between the act of war and the peace that precedes and follows it.
A worthy nation does not pursue war to end peace, but to establish or reestablish it. There was no peace for Jews in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s and there is no peace in Iraq today for those who yearn to live by their own convictions. In the minds of tyrants of the 20th and 21st century, no concept of the sanctity of life exists, thus they crush life immorally and immensely.
There is a tremendous respect for the sanctity of human life in the hearts of the American soldiers, though. It was that respect that caused tears to pour from their very souls when they liberated the concentration camps of Hitler and it is that respect for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that motivates them as they prepare to liberate and save lives in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.
7) Question: Is the Christian movement of which we are a part a safe community to discuss these things?
Reply: The Christian movement is and should be a safe place for believers to voice their ideas. Those who express their thoughts in this safe tent though must remain open to the gracious rebuke of others when they are wrong. In the end, it will be our actions, more than our discussions, that will bear witness to the fruit of our faithfulness. We find ourselves and our nation now at a point where deeds, not words, appear to be needed.
Romans 13: 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil [Saddam]. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword [The US Military] in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath [Shock and Awe] upon him that doeth evil.[Bush] 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Tell your "friend" he/she needs to submit to God's will and the ruler he gave us. That should get your friend spun up!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.