Abraham Lincoln became sixteenth president as an agent of
peace, but he confronted a nation separated south from north. "One of them
would make war rather than let the nation survive,” concluded Lincoln, “and the
other would accept war rather than let it perish.” Thus, the war came! 1
That war crippled America, scarred its national body for
generations to come, killing 418,206, leaving 362,130 wounded citizens. Half a
century later, American politics were so corrupted that adding pre-emptive
strikes to our diplomatic arsenal only added American soldiers as another
foreign invader.
War is expensive! By any measure, it is excessive, even
wasteful! Iraq cost more than 4,400 American deaths. Thousands more carried
wounds. The 2007 surge added 30,000 troops to Iraqi collateral
damages--70-76,000 killed (Washington Post, 8-21-07), paid by credit card.
When unveiling America’s new military-industrial
phenomenon in 1961, President Eisenhower cautioned us regarding grave
implications of the “immense military establishment and a large arms industry.”
He accepted it, but agreed it was “new in the American experience, a total
influence – economic, political, even spiritual.” (Emphasis added).
Ike cautioned us to “guard against the acquisition of
unwarranted influence . . . sought or unsought, by the military-industrial
complex” (emphasis added). He admitted the potentially disastrous rise of
misplaced power, and rightfully feared it. He further insisted, we must
never let this endanger our liberties or democratic processes (emphasis
added).
From the first, America’s founders gave civilian controls
precedence over military powers. Eisenhower warned, take nothing for granted;
“only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the
huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and
goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. . .”2
Decades later,
diplomatic efforts stumble in darkened corridors of the War Department while
Congress marches meekly to the economic ambivalence of the Pentagon. Arms
manufacturers “lobby” hard for jobs in the “growth industry” that now includes
an unseen army of unaccountable para-military sub-contractors earning prime
profit from weapons of destruction.
Should journalists dare to define the philosophical
struggles between diplomacy and defense, few would dare to march by the
peacemaker’s drumbeat.3 The teachings of Jesus no longer offer
relevance to our national debate; therefore Christians ought to withdraw
quietly from public dialogue, privatize personal faith, and allow diplomacy to
wear its military uniform.
If true, that the Christian message of the cross has no
relevance, let us delete John Wesley from the Internet of human history. Wesley
defined himself homo unius libri--“a man of one book.” He proclaimed
that book “the sum of all religion,” which he asserted “is laid down in eight
particulars, and he described the Sermon on the Mount as an aggregate total of
the New Testament message.”4
Jesus challenged humanity to forgive as God forgives.5
Jesus used the cross to interpret God’s indiscriminate love.6 Christian
discipleship challenges us to integrate personal beliefs and behaviors with
actions and attitudes, which Pastor J. L. Sparks calls “transformation.” Jesus
intended for people to negotiate win-win solutions for everyone and eliminate
the win-lose system of human relationships.
“Love does not delight in evil
but rejoices with the truth,” concluded Saint Paul. “It always protects, always
trusts, always hopes, always perseveres ... And now these three remain: faith,
hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. 7
Martin Luther King led the Civil Rights Movement by
challenging followers to “meet the forces of hate with the power of
[Christ-like] love.” Addressing “white brothers all over the South,” King
declared, “we will match your capacity to inflict suffering with our capacity
to endure suffering … Bomb our homes and we will still love you ... We will so
appeal to your heart and conscience that we will win you in the process. 8
During the Cold War, members of one
local church began worshiping above a former missile silo. Seeing potential
opportunity, they built their new facility on top the Titan II ICBM site. Solid
with concrete, the once destructive missile site became a new symbol of hope
for converting swords and missiles into plowshares and worship into
peacemaking.
Pastor, Stewart Elson, called it a fitting closure to
Cold War. He described it as “hope for a world falling prey to its own worst
self” and called ending the Cold War and dismantling the nuclear defense system
a superpower exercise of control, forever hampered by human frailties and
political gaming.
John Bernbaum suggested that Jesus is the consummate
peacemaker. He believed the Church of Jesus Christ, by virtue of its
multinational character, “should by definition be an agent for world peace!”9
Although new faces present our day with the violence and hatreds of centuries-old wars and broken relationships, we are still confronted with the Old Testament Scriptures that reveal a humanity created in
the image of God. We still have the New Testament Scripture that reveals Jesus inviting all
humanity to further experience the love of God, and to ultimately share God’s gift
of reconciliation and indwelling peace.10
Agent of peace, or war: which are you?
_______________
1
Abraham Lincoln, 2nd Inaugural Address, 4 March 1865.
2 Eisenhower's “Farewell Address to the Nation,” January
17, 1961.
3
Stephen Glain, State Vs Defense. New York: Crown Publishers, 2011.
4 The
Works of John Wesley, Vol. V, p. 251.
5 Mt.
6:12, 14; 18:32; Eph. 4:32; Col. 3:13.
6 Mt.
5:43-48; Luke 6:32-36.
7 I Corinthians Chapter 13:8, 13, NIV.
8
Marshall Frady, Martin Luther King, Jr. (New York: Penguin
Putnam, Inc., 2002), p. 5.
9
John A. Bernbaum, Perspectives on Peacemaking. (Glendale, CA: Regal
Books, 1984, p. 254.
10 I
John 1:5-7; 3:1-3, et al.
_____
No comments:
Post a Comment