Yesterday, the front page of the Spectator
was almost covered with photos (72 of them). The article that accompanied them
included this line, “As we remember generations of Canadians who served their
country, we can't help but pause to thank the 71 soldiers and one diplomat who
lost their lives during the
Two or three weeks ago, as I was seeking God about what I should preach on this morning, a Sunday that coincides with Remembrance Day, I came to a similar conclusion. I kept being drawn back to the reality that in the weeks leading up to this Remembrance Day, many of the speakers who would get up in front of school assemblies and history classes would not be veterans of World War II or Korea, but rather men and women who had recently returned from Afghanistan.
I also realised that this war has pretty well split this country down the middle. According to the polls that appear at regular intervals in our papers “support for the war,” however you define it, is running at about 50%. From conversations I’ve had I know that that division runs through this congregation as well.
So I think it’s only appropriate this morning to ask the question, “How do we, as Christians, respond to the issue of war?” Does our faith help us to engage the issue? Or do we just go along with the position of our political party of choice?
My goal isn’t to tell you what you should think, that’s a matter for your own conscience. But I do want to look at what some of the options are for us as Christians so that, at the very least, we might understand those we disagree with and perhaps gain a better understanding of the issues. [might be a bit dry, but it is important]
So why did I call this message, “Christians and Caesar’s War?” What in the world do I mean by “Caesar’s War?”
In the first century, when the New
Testament was written, Europe, Asia and
I have two passports. Because I’m a citizen
of the
Should Christians pay taxes? Jesus pretty much answered that one in Mark 12, but some Christians do withhold part of their taxes as a protest against one thing or another. Can we serve in government as politicians or civil servants? Most would say yes, but some Mennonites for instance, would say no. The questions get harder as you go up the scale. Should Christians serve in law enforcement, as judges or police officers? Should they serve in the army?
What can we give to Caesar, and what must we give only to God? This morning we’re not talking about voting or taxes, or even about law enforcement. We’re talking about war.
[1989 to
2001 lived in
saw the fallout of war up close - villages flattened by bombing - men, women, children without arms and legs - blinded by mines
friends with bullets or shrapnel lodged in their bodies - friends almost been killed - friends who had killed others.
showing the premiere of the Jesus film in Afghan Persian - major bomb - 3 blocks away - killed 37 people (including the governor’s daughter) -took out the electricity for the whole downtown - started the generator and kept going
closest it came to our family - bomb across the street - having lunch in a restaurant - as far as from here to the Big Bee
this isn’t some sort of intellectual debate - it’s very personal.]
One of the interesting things about the New
Testament is that it assumes that political states will make war on each other.
In Matt 24:4 Jesus says, “Watch out that no
one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am
the Christ,’ and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and
rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must
happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against
nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in
various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.”
The Bible is much more realistic about
world politics than many of us are; perhaps because it’s much more realistic
about the human heart. James 4.1-2 says, “What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they
come from your desires that battle within you? 2 You want something
but don’t get it. You kill and covet, but you cannot have what you want. You
quarrel and fight.” The Bible assumes that people,
either as individuals or as groups, will use force to take what they want if
they can’t get it any other way.
That’s fine for Caesar and the kingdoms and
nations of the world. But we are citizens of two kingdoms at the same time. What
about the
In John 18.36 Jesus is on trial before
Pilate and tells him, “My kingdom is not of this world.
If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now
my kingdom is from another place.” Paul says the
same thing in 2 Cor 10.3 3 For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as
the world does. 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of
the world.
That means that we can never justify any
kind of war with the argument that it in some way furthers the gospel. In the
15th century when the Spanish invaded
I’ve had people tell me that the wars in
But, even if we can never justify war as
serving the gospel, that still leaves us with the question of how we respond
when our country takes up arms. As Christians we live in two kingdoms at the
same time. We live in the “Kingdom” of
Historically, Christians have taken one of two paths.
For the first 300 years or so Christians took
the path of total non-involvement in any kind of violence. They were a minority
community who consciously lived as an alternative society. Sometimes they were
persecuted for it. That may be difficult to understand. Why would you persecute
people who never did anybody any harm? Well, they had this thing about saying
“Jesus is Lord.” So what? People say that all the time. You can get bumper
stickers with “Jesus is Lord” on them. The problem is that in the
Incidentally, that’s why Christians
continue to suffer in places like
People who choose the path of non-involvement in war would look to the first half of the passage that was read this morning. There Paul talks about “hating evil,” (12.9) “not repaying evil,” (12.17) and “overcoming evil with good” (12.21).
12:9 says, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good". If you love people you will cling to what is good and hate what is evil.
[That’s different from hating evildoers. You can hate crack and what it does to people and still love the people who are addicted to it, even though they hurt others to feed their habit. You will cling to what is good and will hate what is evil, because you know that evil always harms people, both the victims and the perpetrators. As Christians we are called to love good and hate evil.]
If we hate evil, that means that we can’t repay evil for evil. Rom 12:17-19 says, "Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends.”
Revenge and retaliation is not an option. 1 Pet. 2:23 describes Jesus this way, "when they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats" . Instead, "If it is possible," that is, "as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone." (Rom. 12:18)
If we return evil for evil we actually increase the amount of evil in the world. If we don’t we don’t increase it, but how do we reduce the amount of evil in the world? Verses 20 and 21 say, "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."
You can decrease the amount of evil in the world by doing good to those who hurt you. When the Bible talks about “burning coals” it probably means the sense of shame that comes upon the other person as a result, shame that leads to change.
[During WWII there was an Irish priest, by
the name of Hugh O’Flaherty, who worked in Rome. Hitler sent a ruthless SS
officer, Lt. Col. Herbert Kappler, to
That’s what it means to “overcome evil with good.” Those who take the path of non-involvement would say that this is what we are called to. We are only to overcome evil with good and have no part with any kind of war.
But there is another approach that emphasises the second half of this passage.
In 12:19, in the same place as Paul writes "Do not take revenge, my friends,” he goes on to say, “but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord." In 13:3,4 he goes on to explain one of the ways that God does that. "The one in authority [i. e. the official of the state] ... is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer."
Paul was not an anarchist. In Romans 13 he says that the authority of the state is established by God. That’s pretty remarkable when you realise that this is the same authority that had him whipped and thrown in prison more than once. He’s not saying that everything the state does is good. He’s saying that the institution itself is a good thing, even if it is sometimes abused.
One of the roles of government, according to the Bible, is to reward good and punish evil. In fact Paul says that this is one of the ways that God maintains order in the world. Individuals can’t take revenge, but the state can, and should, reward good and restrain evil.
By the time the church was 300 years old Christians were no longer a marginalised minority and people started trying to figure out ways in which they could take part in the political life of the nation. When you take the idea that government has the responsibility to restrain evil and apply it to nations you get what is called the “Just-War Theory.” “Just war theory” says that war is always a bad thing, but sometimes it is necessary to restrain evil.
Here’s how it works. A policeman can only arrest someone if they have evidence that they’ve done wrong, and they can only use as much force as is necessary to restrain them – no more. In the same way, for a war to be “just,” the goal of the war must be to restrain evil (not to get more land, or oil, or even punish another country) and the force used must not be more than necessary. You also have to make a distinction between combatants and non-combatants, between fighters and civilians. If a war fits those categories then, according to those who hold to the Just-war theory, a Christian can support it, even take part in it.
[Probably the best example of a “just war”
would the WWII, at least in the beginning. Hitler’s war machine had rolled
across
Those are the two basic options we have as Christians. There are some variations but all of them fall into one or other category.
All Christians would agree that we are all
called to live by the standards of Rom 12.9-21 in our personal lives. We are
all called to hate evil, to not repay evil for evil, and to seek to overcome
evil with good. Where people part company is at Romans 13.1. Some will say that
we also have responsibilities as citizens of the world that include the use of
force, even violence, to restrain evil. Others will say that our citizenship is
only in the
Both approaches have their problems. Those who practise non-involvement enjoy the benefits of national security, and perhaps law enforcement, without the responsibility of supporting them. Those who follow the just-war theory have the problem of having to evaluate whether a war is “just” or not, and of perhaps having to kill someone in the line of duty.
This is an issue of conscience. You can’t tell someone else what to believe. You can discuss it, graciously, and hope to convince each other, but in the end it is a matter of conscience.
This Remembrance Day, as men and women who are paid by our tax dollars are putting their lives on the line in Afghanistan, the least that we can do for them is think and pray, long and hard, about these issues, so that the choices we make are based in our understanding of scripture and what we believe God is calling us to.