Since Pope
Francis has suggested changing the liturgical wording of The Lord’s Prayer (the
Our Father) from “lead us not into temptation” to “do not let us fall into
temptation,” Christians of all varieties and even non-Christians have been
talking it. The idea is to bring the translation used in worship in line with
James 1:13, making it clear that “No one, when tempted, should say, ‘I am being
tempted by God’; for God cannot be tempted by evil and he himself tempts no one.”
Please understand, Pope Francis has not proposed changing Jesus’ prayer or the
Bible, only suggesting a clearer translation in line with the rest of the
Bible.
I think an even
more important translation update would be to change “temptation” to “Do not
bring us to the time of trial” as the NRSV does in both Matthew 6:13 and Luke
11:4. As I understand the Greek word peirasmos
traditionally rendered “temptation” could also (sometimes better) be
translated “time of trial” or “time of testing.” That would be consistent with
the book of Job and probably Jesus’ 40 day experience in the desert following
his baptism (Matthew 4; Mark 1; Luke 4). I think it also supports the idea of
not suggesting God tempts us.
Along with
millions of other Christians all over the world, through the centuries, I pray
through the Lord’s Prayer daily. I frequently discuss with God the tests I am
facing each day. In recent months I have sensed that a time of serious testing
in coming upon all of us in the US who want to seriously follow Jesus as his
faithful disciples. I am increasingly convinced this test is a time of
spiritual and moral confusion and conflict being played out in public on a
national and even international scale.
I have been
amazed, even appalled, shocked and disappointed, surprised and incredulous at
the number of leaders among evangelical Christians who are giving Donald Trump
a free pass on his alleged and acknowledged sexual indiscretions. I am not at
all suggesting that I expect the US President or any other government official
(elected, appointed, or hired) to be my brand of Christian (or any brand of
Christian). I affirm the US Constitution’s prohibition of any religious test
for public office. I think our Christian forbearers, who came before
Constantine made a distorted version of Christianity the official religion of
the Roman Empire, would agree that this is actually good for the authenticity
and health of Christian faith and discipleship. The dilution and corruption of
Christianity in the Christendom of Europe led to the dangerous idea that any
nation could be “Christian.” The Puritans tried that in colonial New England
and not only found it unsustainable, but that it undermined the faith of those
who were serious about following Jesus. I would also add that my comments have
nothing to do with political philosophy or any kind of comparison with either
Bill or Hillary Clinton. What I am looking for in those in positions of public
leadership, whether I agree with them on policy or not, is integrity,
authenticity, and accountability. I mention this not to get into a debate about
the cultural consensus about sexuality, but as an important test of spiritual
and moral conflict and confusion those of us who follow Jesus are facing.
However, I am
much more concerned about a less obvious but more ominous test of spiritual and
moral conflict and confusion that seems to be emerging in recent weeks. That is
the juxtaposition of increasing political instability and the beating of the
drums of war. People are leaving Congress and the current administration at an
unusually rapid pace. That so many are Republicans must be making party
regulars uncomfortable. Anticipating the 2018 midterm elections and the 2020
presidential election evokes both hope and fear, depending on one’s political
presuppositions. What effect the #MeToo and #MarchforOur Lives movements will
have remains to be seen. To be sure career politicians are nervous. Some
posturing that seems to prepare for challenging the validity of those elections
already seems to be underway. At the same time, we are hearing both vague and
direct signals that military action is being contemplated in one trouble spot
or another: Syria, North Korea, Iran. That a nation’s people tend to rally
around their leaders in times of war is axiomatic and understandable. Provoking
a war in a time of political insecurity to manufacture national unity has been employed
as a political strategy in many times and places. I am not saying that this is
consciously or unconsciously pursued right now, but I think even the prospect
of it may portend a time of testing, of spiritual and moral conflict and
confusion for those of us who follow Jesus.
Understand, I
am not suggesting anything good about the regimes in Syria, North Korea, Iran,
or any other troubled or totalitarian place in the world. But I would say that
outside military intervention almost inevitably exacerbates the instability and
suffering. The recent history of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya are cautionary
tales we should heed. Violence inherently breeds more violence. When we say
things such as, “Military force is the only language they understand,” we are
betraying our own failure of imagination. I know it is exceedingly hard work,
but if we really care to bring peace and justice to these troubled places, we
must commit ourselves to exactly that work.
I am convinced
that unilateral executive or administrative action is not only fraught with moral
and accountability danger, it invites political disaster and division. The US
Constitution demands that Congress be the avenue for declaring and authorizing
war. Of course, in a time of political chaos, getting a clear direction might
be difficult, perhaps prompting an executive claim of national emergency as a
pretext for proceeding to war without congressional consent. I would hope that
our military leaders would have the moral insight and fortitude to refuse to be
ordered to fight an ill-advised war. We must remember the big lesson of the Nuremberg
trials: following orders does not excuse or justify immoral or illegal
acts in war. From private to general, all military personnel are required to
refuse to obey orders they believe are immoral or illegal.
I readily
acknowledge that I have been a pacifist of religious conviction my entire adult
life and that this perspective influences what I have written. I want to add
quickly that I respect and do not judge those Christians who seek to faithfully
live as disciples of Jesus in military service. I can only say that my pacifism
is intrinsic and integral to my aspiration to follow Jesus as a faithful
disciple which precludes that for me. I do ask that I be similarly respected
without demeaning judgment.
Having said that, my concern here
about this time of testing, of spiritual and moral conflict and confusion for those
of us who follow Jesus is not dependent on a pacifist ethic. Just as I do not
believe the concept of a “Christian” nation is valid, I have no illusions about
any nation adopting a pacifist ethic for international policy. Nevertheless,
ethical principles are essential to discernment should the juxtaposition of increasing
political instability and the beating of the drums of war lead to misguided
military action. Christians of all political and theological persuasions must
consistently call for adherence to the classical principles of just war. These
trace to Greek antiquity and are closely paralleled in Deuteronomy 20. They
were expressed by the pre-Reformation Church Fathers in hopes of minimizing and
regulating war in Christendom, when “Christian” princes would send their armies
to wage war on other “Christian” princes for a host of reasons, real and
imagined.
1. Just
cause – self-defense only
2. Just
intent – restoration of peace with justice for both friend and foe
3. Last
resort – only after all other paths have failed
4. Lawful
declaration – never the prerogative of individuals or parties
5. Immunity
of non-combatants
6. Limited
objectives – unconditional surrender and the destruction of economies and
institutions is unwarranted
I conclude by
returning to my reflections on the line from the Lord’s Prayer, “Do not bring
us to the time of trial” and my concern that those of us in the US may be
facing a time of testing, of spiritual and moral confusion and conflict. I have
written this as part of my earnest prayer that we will not be brought to such a
time of trial. However, as I pray as Jesus instructed each day, the news of
that day intensifies this prayer. These thoughts have been simmering in my heart
and mind so persistently that I felt compelled to get them written. I genuinely
pray that neither national hubris nor political desperation will bring war, but
I did not want to come to the place of regretting that I had not expressed this
sooner.
[i] Holmes,
Arthur F., War and Christian Ethics,
Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1975, pp. 4-5
No comments:
Post a Comment