washingtonpost.com
Can Christians Back This War?
By Henry G. Brinton
Sunday, September 29, 2002; Page B04
When I arrived at Fairfax Presbyterian Church early last year, I was told that there had been a controversy about the presence of the American flag in the sanctuary. Some members wanted the flag to be displayed each week to affirm the congregation's devotion to God and country, while others believed the sanctuary should include only distinctly Christian symbols -- cross, communion table, baptismal font. Having survived this debate at a previous church, I was pleased with the compromise that had been reached at Fairfax: The flag would usually stand in the foyer but be brought into the sanctuary on national holidays.
God and country. It's a tricky issue for American Christians, because we want to show devotion to both without allowing the two to be seen as one.
Unfortunately, the potential invasion of Iraq is causing a crisis of allegiance -- and even identity -- among people who feel torn between loyalty to the United States and loyalty to world Christianity. The contrast between President Bush, who is working hard to drum up support for war, and Christian leaders from around the globe, who are taking strong stands against it, is quite stark -- and all the more difficult to sort out given that Bush speaks often of the importance of faith. A year ago, many Christians, including myself, felt that the use of force against Afghanistan could be morally justified, but fewer support preemptive war against Iraq.
"As Christians, we try to hold citizenship in two places -- the USA and the Kingdom of God," observes William H. Willimon, the dean of the chapel at Duke University. "That causes, in the present moment, some tension."
It is hard for me to chart a straight course for myself and my parishioners when respected religious leaders are recommending an approach that is so different from the president's. The American Roman Catholic bishops have told Bush they cannot justify extending the war on terrorism to Iraq unless Saddam Hussein's regime can be linked to the attacks of Sept. 11. One hundred Christian ethicists from more than 50 schools have signed a petition saying that the president has failed to make a compelling moral case for a preemptive war. This past Tuesday, my regional church body, National Capital Presbytery, passed a resolution opposing military action against Iraq at this time. At a recent World Council of Churches central committee meeting, 37 church leaders signed a statement urging restraint. And the general secretary of the Middle East Council of Churches, Riad Jarjour, Pope John Paul II and Archbishop of Canterbury-designate Rowan Williams all have spoken against resorting to war.
For a worldwide Christian church that rarely agrees about anything, this is quite a consensus. And the widespread religious opposition to invasion can put members of my parish in a tough spot, especially military officers, who are accountable to the chain of command and ultimately to the commander in chief. In fact, this can be an uncomfortable subject for all federal employees, since they have taken an oath of loyalty to the Constitution, and this challenges them to find a way to remain loyal to it while disagreeing with government officials.
Charles Parrott has discovered one path through the maze. A USDA administrator and member of Fairfax Presbyterian, he says that since America was founded to be a government "of the people," the suggestion that we must follow the president's lead in order to be a good American is "mere folly."
To support the Constitution is, he says, quite different from supporting particular elected officials. As a Christian, Parrott says, he cannot endorse an invasion of Iraq. "Although Saddam is reprehensible," he argues, "[since] when does America have the right to attack another country simply because we don't like their leader?"
My parishioner Esther Elstun, a professor at George Mason University who specializes in 20th-century German literature, history and culture, knows all too well from studying Nazi Germany the terrible dilemma that arises when Christian values conflict with the political policies and objectives of a person's homeland. Although she finds no conflict between her Christian convictions and our country's principles as expressed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, she says that Iraq may pose a conflict of allegiance, for she is convinced that an invasion "cannot by any stretch of the imagination be reconciled with the teachings of Jesus." She considers such an action to be both un-Christian and un-American, "which I suspect is why the proponents of the proposed attack prefer to use such contemptible euphemisms as 'preemptive strike' and 'regime change.' "
Of course, some Christians take a very different stand regarding an invasion of Iraq. "I believe that God expects us to help people who are oppressed," says John Warburton, a church member who spent a career in the Air Force. Referring to recent Sunday-service scripture lessons that covered the flight of the Israelites from Egypt, he points out that God allowed many Egyptians to be killed at the hand of Moses. "Why?" he asks. "I think it is because the Egyptian rulers were somewhat like the leadership in Iraq. Their people are oppressed." My parishioner Tim Tarzier, a retired U.S. Air Force officer born in formerly communist Latvia, adds that although he does have moral problems with a conflict involving loss of life, he believes that "neutralizing a known and demonstrated threat is a way to avoid a greater conflict."
For Bush to gain the full support of the American Christian community, he will have to make a case for invasion that reaches across this wide religious spectrum. Traditionally, born-again Christians such as the president have been more concerned about personal morality, such as sex and drinking, than about community morality, as expressed in positions on Christian pacifism and just-war doctrine. Bush's very personal commitment to fighting evil may be preventing him from hearing the nuanced ethical discussions going on in the larger Christian community.
Not that the president is reluctant to jump into the tricky work of defining God's involvement in American life. "We cannot know all that lies ahead," he said in his Sept. 11 anniversary speech. "Yet we do know that God has placed us together in this moment, to grieve together, to stand together, to serve each other and our country." There is certainly truth in these words, but they should not lead us to believe that all Christians will support any and all American military actions -- especially given our religious commitment to warfare that leans toward self-defense and protection of noncombatants, and away from aggression and first strikes. William Willimon tells me that he is currently trying to pay more attention to the Middle East Council of Churches than to the president, and says, "I feel closer to Christians who are there -- and there are a number of fellow Christians in Iraq -- than to the generals who are here."
My colleague Roy W. Howard, pastor of St. Mark Presbyterian Church in Rockville, feels this tension keenly, and he has called together a group of about 20 church leaders to discuss the threat of war as both a theological and pastoral matter. While admitting that "my pledge of allegiance to the United States is in constant creative tension with my pledge of allegiance to God," he explains that he doesn't support an invasion of Iraq at the present time, since he is not convinced that all efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime have been exhausted. Nor does he believe that attacking Iraq right now would necessarily accomplish the goal of a more just and peaceful world.
But the time may come, Howard admits, "as it came for Christians resisting Hitler, that an attack on Saddam Hussein is the absolute only way to prevent the loss of millions of lives." He admires the German Christians, members of the Resistance, who attempted to assassinate Hitler, but he recalls that they did it in a contrite spirit, "casting themselves upon the mercy of God and repenting of their sin." Clearly, we are not there yet, he believes, since one of the criteria of the centuries-old Christian doctrine of "just war" is that all other possibilities for peace have been exhausted. There is still much that can be done internationally to bring about Iraqi compliance with all U.N. resolutions and to move vigorously to eliminate all weapons of mass destruction. Howard argues that "Christians can work with Iraqi citizens to demonstrate visibly against the actions of their leaders which lead to human rights violations, death, and destruction of their people." This thoughtful approach to the issue could be part of a blueprint for Bush, one that would not require immediate military action.
The president needs to address these misgivings, using both political and theological language, if he is to win the support of Christian leaders at home and abroad. Such an effort will pay enormous dividends, since it is becoming increasingly obvious that the war on terrorism is not going to be won by Americans alone -- we will need the collaboration and support of a number of nations. And that process will lead to a far more unified nation and fighting force, and a far more committed world community, if and when the shooting starts.
Henry Brinton is the pastor of Fairfax Presbyterian Church.
© 2002 The Washington Post Company |
