Peace Messenger

Ryan Bell on "Announcing & Enacting Peace in an Age of Empire"

Hollywood Adventist Church Pastor Ryan Bell sets forth the biblical mandate for peacemaking at the newly-launched ReligiousLiberty.TV:

God’s shalom is perhaps the central theme of God’s creation restoring work; the central metaphor throughout scripture for the complete wholeness of creation, which God is restoring....

So, peacemaking – announcing and enacting peace in our world – is evangelism. It is bearing the good news to a world awash in violence, war, poverty, disease and every other injustice. The good news of God’s kingdom envisioned by the prophets (Isaiah most notably), incarnate in the person of Jesus and taught by him in passages like the Beatitudes, is a good news of God’s shalom gaining the upper hand in the world....

...[B]eing peacemakers in God’s kingdom today means speaking and acting for justice for the poor, the outcast, and the war-torn. It means speaking out again an unjust war and actively working to bring that war to an end. It means speaking truth to power and holding power to account for the righteousness that God envisions. In short, being peacemakers in God’s kingdom means being radically committed to overcoming evil with good.

Michael Peabody edits the new ReligiousLiberty.TV site, described as "a leading independent online resource for news, information, commentary, and insights on contemporary issues involving the free exercise and establishment clauses of the United States Constitution."

Christ Commands Talking With Adversaries

The evangelical Christians of the Matthew 5 Project believe that their Lord's teaching about making peace with adversaries by talking (Matthew 5:21-26) is "a command, not an option," and that, in view of "Christ's lordship over all areas of life," they must follow it with regard to international conflict.

Their statement develops seven principles for "national security through international cooperation," leading them to advocate direct U.S.-Iranian negotiations without preconditions:

Ever since the Iranian hostage crisis during the Carter administration, the U. S. government has refused to talk with the Iranian government. But in May, 2006, President Bush and his aides wisely reached the decision to offer conditional talks to Iran. “Mr. Bush's search for a new option was driven, they say, by concern that the path he was on two months ago would inevitably force one of two potentially disastrous outcomes: an Iranian bomb, or an American attack on Iran's facilities.” Therefore, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced on May 31, 2006 that the United States would join multilateral talks with Iran on its nuclear program “once Iran suspends disputed nuclear activities. Kazem Jalali, spokesman for the Iranian parliament's Foreign Policy and National Security Committee, said the U.S. move might be viewed positively in Tehran if preconditions were dropped.”

To give in to the U.S. demand that they suspend enrichment of uranium even before talks begin is very difficult in a culture that values honor. It would mean giving up the right to enrich uranium for generating electricity—a right universally recognized for other nations. David Isenberg writes in Defense News: “After all, nearly 30 years after the 1979 revolution, we need to consider what the policy of no official U.S. dialogue with Iran has achieved in terms of influencing Iranian behavior. In a word: nothing.”Howard Baker, Secretary of State in the first Bush administration, pointed out that despite major disagreements, the United States and the Soviet Union talked directly many times, helping us avoid nuclear war and achieve a peaceful end to the Cold War. Former U. S. foreign policy officials, both Republican and Democratic, including Zbigniew Brzezinski, William Perry, Henry Kissinger, Madeline Albright, Richard N. Haass, and Richard L. Armitage, support direct US-Iranian unconditional negotiations. 59% of Americans support negotiations even if Iran refuses to suspend enrichment....

Jesus is the realist. Talking with Iran, as with Libya and North Korea, may bring surprising peace. Or at least avoid horrible war perpetrated on millions of God’s loving creation—mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and children....

The statements endorsers include Glenn Stassen and David Gushee, co-authors of Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context (InterVarsity Press, 2003).

Read the statement at the Matthew 5 Project web site, and if convicted, add your endorsement!

Shi'a Eschatology...and Ours

Thomas Finger's excellent explanation of Shi'a Islamic eschatology ("Waiting for the Mahdi"), also in the June 17 Christian Century, points out that both U.S. President Bush and Iranian President Ahmadinejad espouse faiths teaching that in the last days, Jesus Christ will return to earth.  The Shi'a branch of Islam, which dominates Iran and is the majority faith in Iraq, teach that in the last days, Jesus will reappear along with the Mahdi -- the last in a series of righteous imams who was taken by God into a hidden state of "occultation" several centuries ago. (Above: Shi'ite pilgrims in Karbala, Iraq, light candles in honor of the birthday of the Mahdi).

Beyond that very broad statement, it is difficult to be definite or precise about the details of Shi'a eschatology, says Finger, because there is such great diversity of understanding.  The same is true, of course, with Christianity.  Finger identifies a particularly salient issue that runs through the eschatological varieties in both world faiths:

A major question is whether the future is seen as discontinuous or continuous with the preceeding history.  When eschatologies stress discontinuity, they often legitimate efforts to bring about that future by violent means.  When eschatologies emphasize some measure of continuity, they usually inspire people to start living by the ideals of the future in the present, and to try to realize them in their societies.

Does Seventh-day Adventist eschatology place more emphasis on discontinuity or continuity?  Answers would likely be varied and complex, but serious discussion of the issue is needful.

The Prophetic Word

Excerpts from Pastor Trevor Kinlock's sermon, "I'm Sick of It!", preached at Calvary Seventh-day Adventist Church in Newport News, Virginia, May 10, 2008:

A fiery preacher named Jeremiah…criticized the nation and its smooth-talking pastors and they threw him in jail and burned his sermon notes (Jer. 36:37)….

Beloved, they cannot handle the message of the prophet, they cannot handle the message of truth, when it challenges the structures of power….

[The prophets'] message is universal, and its speaks to nations, social conditions, and religious institutions and orthodoxy.  “Woe,” and “repent” are the two consistent words of the prophet.

And so, church, if we have a prophetic message, we ought to speak out against the nation when the nation contravenes a “thus saith the Lord.”  Help us God!

And so I declare this afternoon, “Woe unto you, George Bush, for lying about weapons of mass destruction.  Woe unto you for invading and destroying a nation, and arrogantly trading the blood of thousands of American soldiers for oil and strategic dominance.  Woe unto you. Shame on you.  There’s a problem with that....

Repent, America, for exploiting the poor and enlarging the rich.  God is not pleased with that….

Woe unto you, America, for glorifying violence, perverting sexuality, debasing the institution of marriage, and worshipping the “almighty dollar.”  Woe! Woe! Woe!  God is not happy with you.  God is not pleased with you.  God is going to deal.  Judgment day is coming….There’s a God that sits in heaven and He deals with those who oppress His people.  So you better repent!

Last day church, don’t be afraid to preach the prophetic word. Remnant church, Seventh-day Adventist church, don’t be afraid to speak truth to power....

Listen to the sermon at PraizeVision.com.

Adventists at Envision 08

Adventist peace activists and bloggers Ryan Bell and Johnny Ramirez have both recently posted information about Envision 08, a major conference on Christian engagement in the public square, June 8-10 in Princeton, New Jersey.  The conference promises to bring together sixty leading scholars, artists, activists and pastors and offers twenty "learning tracks." One of these, "Religious Pluralism and Christian Faith," will be co-lead by Samir Selmanovic of Faith House Manhattan and the renowned Miroslav Volf of Yale Divinity School. (Johnny's post also includes video of a lecture by Volf on 'How Do You "Un-Do' the Culture of War?")

Shane Claiborne, Brian McLaren, John Perkins, Ron Sider, Jim Wallis and many, many more noteworthies will be among the speakers and learning track leaders.  This should be an exceptionally enriching experience for those dedicated to following Christ in the public square.

Politics, Prophecy and Peace

Politics and Prophecy: The Battle for Religious Liberty and the Authentic Gospel
Christa and Alan J. Reinach, editor
Pacific Press / 2008

In this new book from Pacific Press, nine Adventist authors collaborate to address current issues of religious liberty, building on "the conviction that there is more to modern culture-war battles than can be understood merely through policy analysis or moral discourse -- a conviction that prophetic perspective is essential." The book seeks to chart a way forward, writes co-editor Alan Reinach, that avoids the pitfalls of both "pietism and power politics," instead helping the church "to fulfill a prophetic function: to speak truth to power" (8).

Authors include John Graz, director of the Department of Public Affairs and Religious Liberty for the General Conference, and James Standish, director of legislative affairs for the Seventh-day Adventist Church, along with several others among the church's leading advocates of religious liberty: Barry Bussey, Jonathan Gallagher, Nicholas Miller, Michael Peabody, and Timothy Standish.

Merely in passing, of course, and with a humility worthy of Stephen Colbert, I also note that the book includes a chapter by the editor of this blog and the Peace Messenger electronic newsletter, described as follows by editor Reinach:

Douglas Morgan, an historian who teaches at Columbia Union College, provides a stirring warning about the abuse of American power in his chapter: “Marching to the Call of History.” He reviews the Adventist understanding of the role of the United States in prophecy, and recovers the Adventist imperative to be patriotic critics of the expansion of American power, and the erosion of republican principles.

More on Politics and Prophecy at the Liberty Blog!

Colossians Remixed - 10

Book Discussion Series, Week 10 (conclusion)
Chapter 11, "An Ethic of Liberation" & Chapter 12, "A Suffering Ethic"

An Ethic of Liberation

Paul’s instructions in Colossians 3:81-4:1, and a similar passage in Ephesians 5, have frequently been interpreted as reflecting the “household codes” of Greco-Roman society, perhaps made kinder and gentler, but not fundamentally challenging the structures of slavery and patriarchy.  The authors of Colossians Remixed, however, draw on the reference in 3:24 to the inheritance promised to slaves from Christ, their true Master, in making the case that this passage is consistent with the liberating message of the overall letter.

The term “inheritance” invokes the Old Testament narrative of Israel’s redemption from slavery to sonship, to which the practices of Sabbath and jubilee point. The practices of Sabbath bring “rest and freedom for slaves,” while the jubilee, “the climax of the Sabbath” centers on slaves receiving their lost inheritance. Thus:

The letter is clear if you know the story, if you are aware of the way our God has acted in history up to now. In contrast to the economics of empire, Paul here proclaims the countereconomics of Sabbath and jubilee rooted in the forgiving love of Jesus. By telling the slaves in our midst that they have an “inheritance,” Paul is recalling for us the traditions of jubilee; he is reminding us that Israel’s story – and now, through Jesus, our story – is a slave-freeing story (208).

Similarly, “the Sabbath laws applied equally to women….Rest and freedom are for men and women equally, whether slave or free” (210).

Here is an exercise in hearing the New Testament with Old Testament ears, as the authors admonished us in Chapter Two.  It deserves, and requires, a careful listen.

A Suffering Ethic

Paul concludes his letter to the Colossians with a reminder about his “chains” of imprisonment (4:18), and the final chapter of Colossians Remixed sets forth the reality that being the church – the body of Christ – means sharing the same conflicts with the “principalities and powers” of the present age that led Him to the cross.

We are called to proclaim and embody the gospel of a crucified Messiah. The gospel challenges the principalities and powers of our own age. This gospel proclaims that reconciliation is manifest in a community that is renewed in the image of Jesus, a community that shares in the sufferings of Jesus in its attempt to bring peace to the social, economic, political, racial and ethnic divisions that sin has caused in the world (232).

In sum, the gospel invitation to a culture deeply suspicious of truth claims and the power agendas behind them is “come into the embrace of the Other who rules, but from a cross, who is sovereign but wears a crown of thorns” (233).

Colossians Remixed - 9

Book Discussion Series, Week 9

Colossians Remixed, Chapter 10: "An Ethic of Community"

From an “ethic of secession” (“strip off the old self …”), Colossians 3 progresses to an “ethic of community” (“clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility …”).  While insisting that Paul’s exhortations do not constitute an oppressive “series of absolutes,” Walsh and Keesmaat emphasize that they are rooted in a particular narrative, namely, the narrative of Christ “died, buried, risen, ascended and coming again” (200).  Taking the path opened by that narrative requires a choice that “invariably requires rejecting other paths.”  It means moving beyond the “postmodern mall,” where abundant and wide-ranging options are kept continually open (170).

The virtues and practices expressed in Colossians 3 comprise a “political vision” that transcends but is not detached from the public life of “the empire.”  And the authors get down to specifics on how a Colossians 3-shaped political vision might be lived out.  War, bananas, diapers, bicycles and much more come into consideration.  As for electoral politics, the authors make clear that an “alternative community” based on Paul’s gospel would not stand in aloofness from the need in the society around them:

For our family, municipal elections have become one of our favorite events as we take the kids to our local councilor’s office and get busy going door to door to get him reelected.  That this man is a Christian is a bonus for us, but we would support him even if he weren’t.  You see, his politics demonstrate the character of Christ. His first political questions about any policy or conflict have to do with justice, kindness and service to the most vulnerable. Such a politician is rare and needs our support (192).

Spend some time with this chapter, and see if you aren’t in some way stirred before very long.

Colossians Remixed - 8

Book Discussion Series, Week 8

Colossians Remixed, Chapter 9: "An Ethic of Secession"

Following Paul’s turn to particulars about behavior in chapter 3 of Colossians, Part 3 of Colossians Remixed takes up “praxis.”  The “subversive ethics” remixed from the apostle’s letter both subverts the modernist project of empire and proposes an alternative to a postmodern embrace of nihilism.

“So if you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above….” (3:1). Paul’s resurrection ethic “refuses to bow the knee to the empire and its idols.”  And, it lifts our vision beyond present brokenness of the world to the hope of Christ’s restorative rule, a vision that provides “radical direction” for our lives.

Can this message this message be good news for postmodernists – identifying as it does with their questions but offering different answers?  Chapter 9 wrestles further with that issue, contending that an ethic which at times may superficially appear absolutistic and other-worldly, is in fact an “intimately relational ethic” and a “narrative ethic” grounded in the biblical story of creation and renewal of fully embodied life.

Patriotism, Sports, and the Imperialization of Early Christian Imagery

From "The Private Art of Early Christians" by Peter Brown (New York Review of Books, 20 March 2008, 49-53), which describes the exhibition "Picturing the Bible: The Earliest Christian Art" at the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas:

...[O]ne of the revelations of the catacombs is the extent to which Christians participated, with little sense of incongruity, in the one feature of urban life which their clergy had always condemned as irremediably profane. They frequently went to the games at the Circus Maximus and in the Colosseum.... In the fourth century, Christians were pulled into those moments of high excitement. Grooms and their circus horses appear on many Christian tombs....

We must always remember that fourth-century Christians went to the games not because they were incurably frivolous. The opposite was true. They went because they were patriots. In Rome, the games had always been the emperor's games. They were now laid on by Christian emperors. For a Christian to attend them was a gesture of loyalty. It was on the crowded seats of the Circus Maximus, surrounded by their fellow members of the proud Roman people, that the average Roman—Christian, Jew, or pagan—would have felt, at high moments of procession, that they were truly "One Nation under God." They did not necessarily feel this as intensely in the churches. Indeed, none other than Pope Leo I (440–461) was shocked to learn that many members of his congregation believed that it was the circus games, still celebrated with due pomp and ceremony, and not the supernatural protection of Saints Peter and Paul that had kept Rome safe in an age of barbarian invasion....

It is well known that in 312, the year of his conversion, the emperor Constantine hit on the chi-rho monogram as his own very special image of power. He was convinced that he had seen a vision of the Cross in the sky. But what he promoted for use in his army, as a standard and an emblem on shields, was this "logo" of Christ that was deemed all the more powerful for being a little mysterious, although any Christian would have recognized what it meant. It had brought Constantine's troops victory outside Rome. It continued to do so in a series of bloodthirsty civil wars that probably killed more Roman professional soldiers, in the conflicting armies, than ever perished at the hands of barbarians. Thus the peace of the Church and the subsequent Christianizing of the Roman world were ushered in under the protection of a symbol of good fortune and victory that had as little to do with the Bible (except, of course, for its play on the name of Christ) as a circus horse.

In a masterly contribution, Johannes Deckers spells out the implications of Constantine's decision. In architecture, in coinage, in large-scale representations as in small, we can follow Constantine and his successors as they groped toward forms of visual expression that seemed to be worthy of the emperors' new god: "Christ had to be of imperial stature."...

Two rooms later, in the last part of the exhibition, we see the ultimate symbol of Christ's power at its fullest development—a fragment of the Cross itself placed in a cross of gold studded with gems, given to Rome by the emperor Justin II sometime between 568 and 574 [pictured above].... Glowing in the dark with barbaric splendor, this was still a Cross of victory. As the inscription made clear, this was the Cross on which Christ had "subdued [death] the enemy of mankind." It was also a Cross calculated to keep human enemies (of which there were all too many by that time) away from the walls of Rome.