Saturday, September 13, 2014

Terror and the Christian Response (PRT 2)

In my last post I made the case that Christians, via Christ’s words, are unequivocally called to love their enemies no matter how ridiculous or irresponsible that sounds to the rest of the world.  Yet, problems begin to rise when we know it, but realize no one ever explained how to do it.  The truth is there is no set of instructions and rules to follow per se, but loving our enemies does come through the process of changing our inner-disposition.  

Before I address that, however, let me say this; a non-violent stance carries its own costs and hardships. I can promise it will not come without failure, personal attacks, frustration, anguish and lack of immediate results.  To hold to this is to know what it means to be a suffering-servant for Christ by being faithful to Christ, yet we cannot help but be formed into new persons who carry God’s very presence into every situation.  So, here is what I think are five practical steps to actively doing this:

1. Remember the Shema: The first step to loving your enemies comes from the Shema in which Israel is instructed to love God with their entire being and remember it often (Deut. 6:4-6).   Jesus pointed to this as the greatest commandment, but added “and love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 22:36-40).  Jesus saw that they were intrinsically tied together.  A.J. Heschel said something that is very helpful in understanding this: “In every moment there is something sacred at stake, and it is the reason that the approach of the pious to reality is in reverence.” Reverence meaning: the recognition of the extremely precious—morally, intellectually, spiritually, all that we revere—the sacred. To sense the sacred is to sense what is dear to God. “Just to be is a blessing: just to live is holy.”[1]   If we truly love God with all heart, mind and strength it cannot help but produce love for others.  The very fact that we are dealing people means we are dealing with someone sacred to God no matter how broken and ill-willed that person may be.

2. Re-humanize: This part of the process is to humanize the enemy in our thought life so that we can humanize our actions.  When malicious damage is done it is all too easy for us to dehumanize another, just as that person has done. We easily forget that terror groups and other perpetrators are not the two-dimensional villains that the news and movies like to make them.  They are actual people with all the complexities of life: culture, identity, family, betrayal, pain, joy, pride, insecurity and so forth.  Thus, when violence occurs it is not merely at the hands of an arch-enemy, nor does it occur randomly.  It is most often a result of previous injury or offense done to the perpetrator.  The subsequent human instinct is then to protect.  Within our mind a battle rages for how we will respond and over the course of time it often builds into resentful hate and that hate bears the fruit of violent, destructive acts.  If we look closer at our enemy we will most often find that previous neglected injuries have occurred which has shaped them.[2] However, we cannot continue the same vengeance cycle, but we have the choice to break it by being sensitive to them and remember both that they are in need of healing and that Jesus died for them too.  They are of incalculable worth to God and this is what we should keep in mind when we think about them. 

3. Pray for them Often: Linked with the second is the third part of the process: our prayer life.  This is based firmly on the propositions that our war is not against flesh and blood, but spiritual forces of wickedness (Eph. 6:12-13) and our prayerful communication and petition to God is what actively counteracts those forces (Mk. 9:28-29).  Satan has long been out to destroy what is precious to God, including himself, and is at work within the very universe God is working to redeem.  So, we cannot be passive bystanders, but must actively pray into the situations and lives of those who are blinded by hatred and hard-hearted towards others.  As we pray for them we cannot help but become invested in their situations and learn to care about their needs (even if it is from afar).     
        
4. Practice a New Response:  I think it is safe to say that most Christians desire to have a Christ-like character that operates in difficult situations with sound judgment, courage, self-control and a determination to love. We would be remiss to think that we automatically posses the virtues that enable this.  For example, a good paramedic does not wait until they are in an unplanned situation before deciding what he or she is going to do.  Rather, they have previously spent lots of hours learning, training, thinking through problems and developing the virtues to handle specific scenarios.  The same can be applied to any profession that needs the worker to be at the top their game.   Why should Christian spirituality be any different?  We must decide before hand to not respond to violence, or everyday problems, with violence and begin by practicing that.  First practice scenarios in your mind where you would normally lose your temper and practice alternative responses (perhaps just begin by refusing to respond in a way that demeans or tears another down).  Then practice on those in your sphere (i.e. stubborn spouses, disobedient children, annoying neighbors, self-maximizing co-workers and so forth).  Watch and see the difference it makes in all of your immediate relationships.

5. The Holy Spirit: I cannot end this without saying that apart from the Helper’s active work in our lives none of this is possible (Jn. 14:16-27; Gal. 5:22-23).  We do not often think about it, but our imaginative process in our prayer life and thoughtful practices are very much God’s design, so let the Holy Spirit lead there.  Make this as simple as inviting Holy Spirit’s presence into your daily life and invite Him again (so to regain your focus) whenever you do any of what I have mentioned so that you may be open to His leading in all things.



[1] Abraham Joshua Heschel. Man is not Alone: A Philosophy of Religion (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux 1951), 286.


[2] I am not saying that Islamic teaching has not played a part in this, but I am also not getting into that argument at the moment because it has been argued both ways and I do not know the Quran well enough to open my mouth. What I am saying is instances of Mogadishu and 9/11 were what are known as a “Blowback”.  Blowbacks are unintended consequences that come from covert operations suffered by the aggressor, but the public knows nothing about it and thus it looks one-sided.  You can look it up, but America trained Al-Qaeda to fight against the Soviets back in the 80s. When it became cost effective, we lost interest and pulled out leaving them to get slaughtered.  Those who survived were mad and wanted revenge.   This does not justify their action, but points to how little we know.

2 comments:

  1. Having been in a Mennonite Church for years, this is something we have thought about. We've heard one of them say that if someone broke into his house and tried to kill his family, he would respond by killing them if that is what it takes to protect his family. I think this is a valid exception to the nonviolent policy Christians should adhere to in our relationships, whether it is our family or our nation that is being threatened. I don't think we need to consider whether their aggression is prompted by their history of painful experiences.
    Your blog seems to address the stressful situations of everyday interactions rather than the attacks of terrorists. I want our nation to protect us from every attack that is perpetrated upon the American people. I can't imagine a military without the presence of valiant Christian men protecting our nation. So, I agree that in the life of the average Christian, love covers a multitude of sins. We should practice more of it!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nancy, I always enjoy your responses. You bring up a couple of good points here and perhaps you are right that I did not do enough to present this in light of terrorist atrocities. My reason for this (and it may have just fell short) was a twofold purpose: First, I do believe our actions of non-violent practices must start small and in our daily lives with personal enemies and second, that practice should carry over to how one views and deals with national enemies. To clarify my point more, I basically wanted to show each one of the terrorists is a person with a past, identity, culture and there is something that drove them to hate and murder, but none are beyond Christ’s redemption. This does create a dilemma because if we are going to follow Jesus it seems we can no longer use any means to bring a “peaceful” end. Being a peacemaker is the new means by which we can reflect God’s image and inaugurate the Kingdom end, but it comes with the problem of thinking of alternative solutions to a lot of situations.

    Your other point, that if an intruder attacked one’s family, or a terrorist attacked one’s country, it would be an exception to the not killing rule. This is a view held by many Christians. Interestingly enough, it was also a point refuted by a Mennonite professor of theology and ethics. I won’t bog you down his argument, but it’s out there if you ever want to read it (John Howard Yoder "What Would You Do?").

    I will say this though, the N.T. commands us never to “repay evil with evil but overcome evil with good” (Rom.12:17; cf. I Thess. 5:15; I Pet. 3:9). We are told to never resist an evildoer, but if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also (Mt 5:39). So also, we are to love our enemies, do good to those who hate us, bless those who curse us, pray for those who abuse us (though this does not suggest staying in abusive relationships either) (Lk 6:27-28).

    Nevertheless, not once are we given exceptions to this. So I guess my underlying question here is how do you justify it? Can we really claim to be possessors of Christ’s love toward all people and support, or carryout, the inhalation of any enemy (home invader, terrorist or otherwise)?

    ReplyDelete