Category Archives: Politics

Jesus as troublemaker

I have started again on my series of sermons on Jesus based on the Gospel of Luke. My October 17 sermon, the eighth in the series, focuses on Luke 9, which is a focused discussion on Jesus’ identity—prophet or Messiah or Son of Man or Son of God? These are the options mentioned in the text.

The sermon suggests that the key motif in this chapter of Luke that clarifies Jesus’ identity is how Jesus was a troublemaker. And he serves as a model for his disciples to join him in “holy troublemaking.”

The sermon may be found here: it’s called “The Troublemaker.” The other sermons in the series may be found here.

The Long Shadow: World War II’s Moral Legacy

Ted Grimsrud—EMU University Colloquium—9/29/10

[During the 2010-11 school year, I am taking a sabbatical and working on a book project on the topic covered in this lecture. This is kind of a preliminary report. I hope to post drafts of the chapters of the book on this website as I get them ready. Comments are coveted!]

World War II was the biggest catastrophe ever to befall humanity. Think of it like this: say a meteorite crashes into Harrisonburg and kills 40,000 people. This would be incredible news. America’s worst ever natural disaster. But then, imagine that something like this happens every single day for five years. You can’t imagine that? Well, that’s what World War II was—40,000 people killed every single day for five years.

But World War II wasn’t a natural catastrophe—it was something human beings did to each other. These 75 million people didn’t just die due to impersonal nature run amok. They were killed by other people. World War II was an intensely moral event. Human choices. Human values. Human actions.

And World War II has cast a long shadow. We’re still in its shadow. As William Faulkner wrote, “the past is never dead. It’s not even past.” Just one example. In Barak Obama’s acceptance speech upon receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, just last December, he alluded to the necessity for America to fight our war in Afghanistan—and cited the war against Hitler as one key rationale. That war was obviously a necessary war, our nation’s “good war,” and it helps us see our current wars as necessary as well.

So, to come to terms with our moral stance concerning our present wars (and all wars require a moral stance of one kind or another), we need to come to terms with the moral legacy of the big war, World War II, the one that stands, in this country, as the paradigm for war’s necessity. This is my focus during this sabbatical year.

As I work on this project, I reflect on this war’s impact on my own life. World War II brought my parents together. My father, Carl, grew up in Minnesota. My mother, Betty, in Oregon. In early 1941, Carl enlisted in the Army and was first stationed in eastern Oregon. He met Betty, they fell in love, and promised to join together as soon as the War was over. This is their wedding picture. Carl fought with distinction for three years in the Pacific war, was promoted to captain, and actually asked by the army to stay in. But he’d had enough of guns and wanted to build a life with Betty, who had spent the war years also in the army as a recruiter.

They started having kids right away, ultimately contributing five to the baby boom generation. It took until 1954 to come up with a boy. Betty wanted to name him Carl III, but Carl said no, I want to name him Ted, after my best friend who was killed in combat.

I didn’t hear a lot about “the War” growing up; it was always in the background though, as something important and good that my parents had played their part in. The one conversation I remember came when I was 17. My dad urged me to apply to attend one of the military academies. He said his military service was a terrific experience and he thought I’d value it too. I didn’t agree, and he didn’t press the point. Continue reading

America’s Shame

Tim Weiner. Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA. Anchor Books, 2008.

This is both an illuminating and frustrating book. Tim Weiner is a long-time reporter for the New York Times whose beat has been the American intelligence community. This book won numerous rewards, is engagingly written, and draws on a remarkable selection of sources—including direct interviews with many involved in intelligence work and wide-ranging examination of archival materials.

Weiner probably is uniquely qualified to write this book. To his credit, he names names, cites his sources, lays the materials openly on the table. I think we should, to a large extend at least, believe the tales he tells. And hair-raising tales they are. Weiner shows us that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the Central Intelligence Agency has from its beginning in the aftermath of World War II been a force for incredible evil in the world.

At the same time as we learn of the CIA’s mostly uninhibited zeal for murder and mayhem, generally in the context of the denial of self-determination for innumerable peoples around the world, we also learn of the extraordinary failures of the Agency. Most notably, the CIA utterly failed to gain understanding of the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. In the first couple of decades, the CIA left the American government pretty much completely in the dark concerning Soviet activities and intentions. It’s amazing and extremely distressing to realize that the entire first generation of American cold warriors, who shaped our nation in tragic ways toward domination by militarism, beat the drums of warning against the Soviet threat with absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of what was actually going on with the Soviets. It truly boggles the mind.

Then, at the end of the Cold War, with the CIA continuing to feed its political masters the analyses that were desired to sustain the Cold War that had become so profitable for the American Military-Industrial Complex, our “intelligence” service complete missed the signs of the impending collapse of the Soviet system. Continue reading

Learning from the 1940 Debate about War?

Joseph Loconte, ed. The End of Illusions: Religious Leaders Confront Hitler’s Gathering Storm. Rowman and Littlefield, 2004.

“Even though you meant it for evil, God intended it for good.” These words, a paraphrase of Joseph’s finals words to his brothers in Genesis 50:20, came to mind as I read this book that Joseph Loconte, a scholar on the staff of the Heritage Foundation, put together. Loconte meant for this book to serve the rhetorical campaign American militarists are waging to garner and sustain support for the “war on terrorism.” Though these purposes are highly problematic, the book (excepting Loconte’s introduction) is actually fascinating and important—though not for the purposes indended.

Loconte has gathered an extensive collection of writings from prominent American Protestant leaders (plus one Jewish writer) who engaged in a passionate debate in 1939-41 about the role the United States should play in relation to the war being waged in Europe between the Nazis and British. The first half of the book includes pieces from those who opposed military intervention, generally on pacifist grounds; the second half gathers materials from those who supported taking sides with the British and offering material aid for the Allied cause (though, since the materials all were published before Pearl Harbor in December 1941, even these latter writings do not overtly advocate American direct military engagement).

So, we have an important resource here that sheds light on Christian perspectives during what was a momentous time in American history. Despite his present day agenda, to Loconte’s great credit the introductions to the various writings are models of objective description that do a nice job of putting the articles in historical perspective.

Continue reading

A Surprising Critique of World War II

Patrick J. Buchanan. Churchill, Hitler, and “The Unnecessary War”: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World. Crown Publishers, 2008.

This is a surprising book, at least to me. I’ve not read much of Pat Buchanan’s stuff. I know him mainly by reputation—a speechwriter for Richard Nixon, self-labeled paleo-conservative, critic of empire, quasi-isolationist, third party presidential candidate in 2000 whose candidacy would have cost George Bush the election had the votes in Florida been accurately counted. And, now, a sharp critic of America and British involvement in World War II.

Buchanan surely is not a pacifist, but there is little here that wouldn’t give the reader the impression that he leans in that direction. He does not come across as a Nazi sympathizer. He greatly dislikes Winston Churchill (with good reason) and Joseph Stalin (also with good reason). One does sense a somewhat extreme hatred of Soviet communism, but this antipathy does not come directly to the surface very often.

Buchanan is not a professional historian—a fact that probably works more in his favor than against him. It’s just that the reader must recognize that what this book gives us is a somewhat speculative essay on what didn’t have to be with numerous historical illustrations (not an exercise in careful archival research tested with professional historian peers). However, the strength of the book is the clarity of its argument which is not overly burdened with qualifications, or with careful delineation of minute arguments, or with “on the one hand/on the other hand” summaries. Certainly, Buchanan’s points need to be viewed cautiously and should stimulate further efforts on the interested reader’s part to test them against the evidence and other opinions. But that’s all to the good.

In a nutshell, Buchanan suggests that Great Britain should not have gone to war against Nazi Germany—which would have meant that the United States would not have gone to war with Germany either. If this had happened (or, rather, not happened), Germany and the Soviets would basically have ground each other to dust, the British Empire would not have disintegrated so quickly, and—probably most important for Buchanan’s purposes—the United States would not have succumbed to the hubris of striving to be the world’s one superpower and followed its current path to self-destruction.

Buchanan’s agenda is surely different than mine. As a Christian pacifist, I am pretty suspicious of Buchanan’s style of American-first patriotism. However, I am willing to walk quite a ways down the path he articulates in this book outlining the hugely problematic dynamics of the American and British participation in World War II and the disastrous consequences (for American democracy and the well-being of millions of victims of American imperialism in the past 65 years) of the aftermath of that war.

So, I am grateful to Buchanan for this stimulating and mostly well-written book. I recommend it, only now I have to figure out if I dare cite it when I try to articulate some of my critical views about World War II and its consequences.

Jesus’ Identity—And Ours

I continued my sermon series this morning on why we pay attention to Jesus, based on the story told in the Gospel of Luke. This sermon (the seventh out of thirteen), called “Jesus’ Identity—And Ours” (and posted here), focused on Luke 7:18-23.

Jesus began his ministry by gaining wide renown as a miracle worker and powerful teacher. He drew crowds, and as this text shows, strong, respectful interest from John the Baptist (as well as a Roman centurion and Pharisee). Luke raises the question of Jesus’ identity in the context of telling of this interest.  As John’s disciples asked him, “Are you the One to come.”

Jesus does not answer the question with a straightforward “yes” but rather answers in the affirmative by reciting the things he’s been doing, summarized with the series’ final clause: “bringing good news to the poor.” In doing so, Jesus points ahead to the big “fork in the road” at which he will arrive—where the choice is ministry by acclaim and success or ministry resistance and suffering.

Jesus, in taking the path of resistance provides a model for all his followers. We find our identity linking ourselves with God’s “preferential option for the vulnerable.”

Book Reviews

Theology for Restorative Justice

I am working on a book with the tentative title, Healing Justice (and Theology): An Agenda for Restoring Wholeness.  This small book is meant to be both an introduction to the emerging practices of restorative justice that seek to provide an alternative to the spiral of violence characteristic of our current criminal justice system and an analysis of theological resources that might undergird a Christian approach to restorative justice.

I start with an summary of some of the current dynamics in North America that are placing us in an ever-deepening crisis. At the heart of this crisis, I suggest, is a problematic commitment to what I call the “logic of retribution” that rather than leading to healing of the alienation caused by crime instead mainly heightens the alienation. This logic of retribution has theological roots and hence needs to be challenged on a theological level.

The bases for an alternative approach to justice, one that focuses on restorative rather than retributive dynamics, may be found in the Bible. I look at the big storyline of the Bible and then more closely at the portrayal of justice in the book of Amos, the life and teaching of Jesus, and the early Christian writings of Romans and Revelation.

The concludes with a summary of present-day efforts to embody restorative justice practices and to provide alternatives to the spiral of vengeance.

These are links to the book’s nine chapters:

1. Introduction: An Agenda for Restoring Wholeness

2. Our Current Crisis

3. The Logic of Retribution and Its Consequences

4. Healing Theology: A Biblical Overview

5. Old Testament Justice (Amos)

6. Jesus and Justice

7. Justice in Romans and Revelation

8. Putting Restorative Justice into Practice

9. Restoring Wholeness: The Alternative to Vengeance

Bibliography


Book Reviews

Here’s a list of books I have recently reviewed, linked to the reviews.

Harry S. Stout. Upon the Altar of the Nation: A Moral History of the Civil War (May 3, 2010)

Theron F. Schlabach. War, Peace, and Social Conscience: Guy F. Hershberger and Mennonite Ethics (March 15, 2010)

Joseph Kip Kosek. Acts of Conscience: Christian Nonviolence and Modern American Democracy (March 8, 2010)

Core Convictions for Engaged Pacifism

The term “pacifism” is used quite often for many things—though generally without definition.  I believe “pacifism” is a great term and a great ideal when properly understood.  In the essay, “Core Convictions for Engaged Pacifism,” I spell out how pacifism works well as an orienting point.

The essay can be read here.

The background issue that was in my mind as I wrote was how pacifists might engage in resisting evil in our world. I argue that pacifism provides a perspective that helps us work at resisting evil without creating additional evils. I write in a Christian context, but actually believe that people who aren’t Christians should be able to affirm just about all of the eight core convictions I discuss.