Living & Dying By the Sword

I have been doing a lot of reading of the Bible and commentators on the use of the sword. This has been a reaction to hearing Shane Claiborne advocate the laying down of arms unilaterally. I take Shane seriously, so his arguments deserve attention.

Shane advocated no response from the West to the 9-11 attacks. He may personally not seek justice against an enemy who violated him specifically, that is his Christian choice (forgiveness does not preclude punishment), but he has no right to dictate the terms of response of the aggrieved families, friends, communities, and our nation, to the attacks. He illegitimately subsumes the right to respond. His position, supposedly ethical , is profoundly unsettling, in that he seems to view that his prerogative should predominate. There is much about Shane that I admire and respect, but on this, he is wrong.

There should be times when Christians should object to the unjust use of force. Our invasion of Iraq, especially in retrospect was unjust. Afghanistan, who hosted Al-Qaeda and gave it aid, deserved to be attacked, not as a matter of blood lust revenge, but as a matter of justice and to prevent further terrorism. Bush's taunting of the enemy was unwise, as well as his veneration of American motives, supposedly pure (not to preserve our first dibs in the line to the petrol). It is possible to respond with force in sorrow and regret. Rejoicing over entering war should never be sanctioned by the Church. With tears, we should pick-up our guns and with a contrite spirit enter a conflict. If the conscience, supported by biblical parameters, shows the aggression to be wrong, we should refuse to serve, court martial or not.

Someone at Claiborne's talk during the Q & A asked him about the "Just War" theory and he said all war is just war...as in let us be real about what war is...a destructive outworking of the insolence and arrogance of man. All parties in war think their cause Just. True, we are prone to self-righteousness, and never so dangerous when accompanying that spirit with bombs, tanks, and guns. Yet, despite the pacifist arguments, war may be a necessity. But his critique has a lot of validity, particularly in regards to our nuclear arsenal. We can already blow up the world a hundred-fold.

Granted, only God judges rightly, perfectly, and without error. He does not need to appeal to The Hague or refer to the Geneva Conventions for support. His decisions are final with no appeal, in particular to the eternal destiny of each man, woman, and child, who ever walked the earth. Heaven or Hell (really the Lake of Fire if we read the Bible rightly), no third way.

In the Civil sphere, both internationally and in our nation, if we are waiting for man to become deity-like in judgment, it is never going to happen. Until God draws history to a close, in the meantime, we live in a broken world where nothing is pure and no one is pure. What we have to deal with is appropriate punishment for sin, some of which our culture and world no longer treats as a moral crime (i.e. external behavior, violation of the Ten Commandments). Violations against people and property. To not punish crime is a societal suicide. For crimes against property, servitude and restitution (at least double, for the trouble). No sitting in a cell thinking that pays the debt to the victim. For crimes against people, an eye for an eye. Period. With measure, with prudence, with a firm execution.

Romans 13:4

For he is a minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil.