Category Archives: Politics

Brian McLaren. Everything Must Change

Brian McLaren is an evangelical pastor who has gained prominence in recent years as a leader in what has been called the “emergent church” movement. In his pursuit of an authentic gospel, McLaren has grown increasingly radicalized politically and ethically. Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope, published in 2007 by Thomas Nelson, provides a chance for McLaren to articulate a theologically and ethically integrated call to think carefully about the relevance of the story of Jesus for current social problems.

I’m not sure about the effectiveness of McLaren’s attempt to personalize his discussion by injecting his own experiences visiting Africa. However, there is not question in my mind that he has identified precisely the kinds of issues people of faith must be facing in our contemporary world. His term “suicide machine” for contemporary culture under the strangehold of militarism and corporate capitalism is not hyperbole.

What makes this book so important is McLaren’s effort to face head on the major systemic problems of our world in light of the life and teaching of Jesus. The book I would compare this one to is Walter Wink’s Engaging the Powers. McLaren is not the scholar or original thinker that Wink is, but he is a more accessible writer and is up-to-date (Wink’s book came out in 1992).

I really can’t recommend this book highly enough. I had the privilege of meeting Brian McLaren this past summer. He struck me as a sincere, committed Christian thinker and pastor. I am thankful he has “emerged” during these troubled times.

 

Peace Theology Book Review Index

Witnessing to Anabaptist faith in American politics

Are the only alternatives for pacifist Christians in America either to withdraw into separated communities that remain (relatively) free of violence or to bracket their pacifist convictions while engaging in the public arena?  This article, “Anabaptist Faith and American Democracy,” makes the case for a third approach.

This third approach follows from the belief that Jesus’ peaceable social ethics are ultimately meant for the entire world and that the call he has given his followers is to witness to his way to the ends of the earth.  One helpful insight that should encourage American pacifist Christians is an awareness that we live in two Americas, the American republic (which is compatible with pacifism) and the American empire (which is not).  One may oppose the American empire while still embracing (nonviolently) the American republic.

Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw, Jesus for President: Politics for Ordinary Radicals

During this “political” season, characterized by powerful and wealthy people seeking to exploit our system to expand their power and wealth, this book by Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw, Jesus for President: Politics for Ordinary Radicals, comes as a very welcome breath of fresh air.

As is likely obvious by the title and the publisher (Zondervan), Jesus for President, is written by two young Christians aimed at a Christian audience.  And this book needs to be read by Christians.  However, many people of good will who have written off Christian faith may find this book an eye-opener and inspiration.

Continue reading

James J. Sheehan. Where Have All the Soldiers Gone? The Transformation of Modern Europe.

One of the remarkable dynamics of the past century has been the evolution of Western Europe from the scene of some of humankind’s most destructive wars to a place where now warfare seems almost unthinkable. Stanford University historian James J. Sheehan gives us an explanation of this dramatic change in Where Have All the Soldiers Gone?: The Transformation of Modern Europe.  Sheehan presents a carefully articulated, sober account of the exhaustion of European people as a consequence of the unthinkable destruction they visited on themselves–and their ability finally to begin to move decisively away from war as a way of life.

Continue reading

Against Empire: A Yoderian Reading of Romans

I believe that we should understand the Apostle Paul to be presenting a radical message that combines pacifism with resistance to the Roman Empire. What follows is a paper presented August 13, 2008, at a conference, “On Being a Peace Church in a Constantinian World” at Messiah College. This paper utilizes the thought of John Howard Yoder to make a case for this kind of reading of Paul.

Against Empire: A Yoderian Reading of Romans—8/13/08—Ted Grimsrud

John Howard Yoder, the Mennonite theologian and advocate for Christian pacifism, as much as anybody in the last half of the 20th century, popularized the critique of Constantinianism, which he understood as a Christian problem. For Yoder, “Constantinianism” refers to a way of looking at social life. Constantinians believe that the exercise of power is necessarily violent, that God’s will is funneled through the actions of the heads of state, that Christians should work within the structures of their legitimately violent nation-states and take up arms when called upon to do so, and that history is best read through the eyes of people in power.

Most people who have read the Gospels agree that Jesus stands in tension with Constantinianism. I remember in grad school, my teacher Robert Bellah stating that John Yoder had convinced him that Jesus indeed was a pacifist. However, once Christians began to take responsibility for society in the fourth century (and it was a good thing that they did, according to Bellah), they simply had to look elsewhere than to Jesus for their ethical guidance.

For most Christians in the past 2,000 years, the Apostle Paul has been a key bridge who prepared the way for the Constantinian shift in the 4th century. Thus, it is no accident that after Constantine, Paul’s writings become central for Christian theology (much more so than the Gospels). For Yoder, though, it is misreading Paul to see him presenting something other than a reinforcing of Jesus’ message.

My interest today is to look at Yoder’s non-Constantinian reading of Paul. I will suggest that indeed Paul’s theology provides us powerful resources that might help us walk faithfully with Jesus today as peace churches in a world still all too Constantinian. Yoder devotes his book The Politics of Jesus to explaining what Jesus’ life and teaching have to say to Empire. He outlines a way of reading the entire Bible in light of Jesus, including paying close attention to the writings of Paul, seeing Paul’s thought as resting in full continuity with Jesus.
Continue reading

Is the book of Revelation a resource for peacemaking?

The book of Revelation, though having the reputation of being a book of violence, actually is more accurately read as a book supporting nonviolent resistance to empires and their servants.

This article, “How should 20th-century Christians read the book of Revelation?”, was originally published in Gospel Herald, January 21, 1992, shortly after the 1991 U.S. war on Iraq.

Noam Chomsky. The Chomsky Reader.

Everyone would agree that Noam Chomsky is an extraordinarily prolific writer. Beyond that, when we begin to evaluate his work, the controversies begin. I have no idea how many anthologies of his writings have been produced (a great many, I am sure). The Chomsky Reader was first published in 1987, so in some ways it is a bit dated. Other more recent anthologies of Chomsky’s political writings exist and may be better overviews of his thought. However, sadly, much of what The Chomsky Reader contains remains of much more than historical interest.

Personally, I believe that Noam Chomsky is a wonderful gift to those of us deeply concerned with applying our pacifist convictions to the real world. This book is a more than adequate starting place to get a sense of the way Chomsky cuts through American self-delusions about our military policies and our impact on the rest of the world. Chomsky’s reputation as a wild-eyed radical seems to rest on reactions by people who likely have read little of what he has actually written. If anything, Chomsky errs on the side of dispassion in his analyses. He is very factual in his discussions, and usually provides extensive documentation.

One of the major contributions this anthology makes today is to remind us that as noxious as the policies and practices of the present Republican administration might be, the policies and practices of earlier Democratic administrations have also wrought great destruction in the world (specifically, Chomsky discusses the Johnson and Carter administrations).

One element of Chomsky’s thought that impresses me a great deal is his rigorous use of moral convictions. Though the underpinnings of his moral rigor are not clearly revealed in this book, Chomsky has discussed in other contexts the influence of his Jewish up-bringing and the continued relevance for him of the witness of the biblical prophets he studied in Hebrew school.

One fruit of this moral rigor may be seen in Chomsky’s insistence that as Americans we have a powerful responsibility to hold ourselves to the same standards we use in evaluating other cultures (e.g., the “communists” during the Cold War and, he makes clear in more recent writings, the “terrorists” today). If we hold to objective moral criteria, we will reject injustice and oppression no matter who practices it–and we will especially take responsibility for stopping the unjust and oppressive practices of our own society.

Chomsky is often labeled as “anti-American,” clearly a slander that comes from those who want to avoid taking his analyses seriously. He is simply asking Americans to seek consistently to adhere to our stated values of equality and human rights.

In this collection, the essay I found most helpful was one he wrote in the mid-1980s comparing U.S. fighting in Vietnam and Central America: “Intervention in Vietnam and Central America: Parallels and Differences.” Again, reading this most helpful analysis would cure any opponents of current American practices of nostalgia for the old days when supposedly things weren’t so bad.

The other part of the book I want to draw attention is the section containing three essays under the rubric, “The Responsibility of Intellectuals.” These essays have a timeless quality that allows them, sadly, to remain as relevant to today as when they were first written.

Eric Hobsbawm. On Empire: America, War, and Global Supremacy

When Eric Hobsbawm writes about empire and the United States, people with strong interests in peacemaking should pay attention. The nice thing about his 2008 book, On Empire: America, War, and Global Supremacy is that it is short, sweet, and to the point. This book includes four concise essays, totaling 91 pages–small, with lots of white space. So it’s a quick read. That does not mean that it’s lightweight, though.

Hobsbawm, who was born in 1917 and still remains a keen interpreter of current events and their historical contexts, compares the American empire with the British empire. As his classic one-volume history of the “short twentieth century,” Age of Extremes shows (along with many of his other works), he is not fan of the British empire. But he sees the American empire as even more problematic.

However, On Empire is not a polemic so much as a brief but perceptive taking account of the recent past, present, and possible future of America’s militaristic imperialism. Hobsbawm argues against the efficacy and moral legitimacy of “humanitarian armed intervention.” He points out that with the emergence of ever-stronger drives for self-determination among the world’s people, “would-be empires can no longer rely on the obedience of their subjects….[Hence,] there is no prospect of a return to the imperial world of the past, lel alone the prospect of a lasting global imperial hegemony” (pp. 12-13).

The impossibility of the U.S. sustaining its global hegemony should be encouraging news. However, Hobsbawm (who indeed does think it is good news) also points out the bad news: “There is now…a complete absence of any effective global authority capable of controlling or settling armed disputes” (pp. 24-25). That is, we have no basis for optimism in the foreseeable future that we have much hope of solving the violence problem.

This book is not a call to arms so much as a pessimistic but insightful snapshot of our current situation. It’s readable and seems trustworthy.