I've heard it said that history is written by the victors. While
that's often the case, it's not universally true. For example, Dee
Brown's Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee tells the story of the
American West from a Native American perspective, and it is written by a
Native American. Josephus, a Jew, wrote The Jewish Wars in the
aftermath of the Roman defeat of the Jews in the late first century.
Southerners, who lost the U.S. Civil War, began writing histories of
that war and of the Reconstruction period soon after the latter ended in
1877, and their interpretations carried the day, at least in the South,
for about a hundred years. In particular, I remember learning in school
that the Reconstruction period in the South was a time of chaos,
injustice, and confusion for the poor white southerners, who had to deal
with recalcitrant and ungrateful former slaves, Northern carpetbaggers,
and Southern scalawags. Only by dint of tremendous effort, Southern
historians said, did true patriots regain control of the South after the
War between the States (or the War of Northern Aggression, as it was
sometimes called). A fairly extreme example of this portrayal of
history appears in the 1915 silent film The Birth of a Nation.
Most modern historians reject this extremely negative portrayal of
Reconstruction, and especially the relatively positive portrayal of
groups like the Ku Klux Klan in some of these histories, but competing
visions of Reconstruction persist to this day. Today's reading from
Hosea features a negative reading of an episode from Israelite history,
the revolt and accession to the throne of Jehu. The prophet condemns
the slaughter instigated by Jehu: "Name him Jezreel; for in a little
while I will punish the house of Jehu for the blood of Jezreel, and I
will put an end to the kingdom of the house of Israel." This portrayal
of Jehu's revolt contrasts with the mostly positive portrayal recorded
in 2 Kings 9-10. The Deuteronomistic Historian, who wrote this version
of the history of Israel and Judah, praises Jehu for removing Joram,
Ahab's son, from the throne of Israel, Ahaziah, Ahab's nephew (?) and
son-in-law, from the throne of Judah, and for killing Queen Jezebel and
seventy sons of Ahab. From his perspective, Jehu was cleaning house,
getting rid of a wicked ruling family. Hosea saw things quite
differently. He decried the excessive violence of Jehu, seeing it as a
violation of God's will. From the perspective of almost three thousand
years in the future, I have to agree with Hosea's reading of history.
The Kings account glorifies bloodshed in a way that I find offensive and
contrary to my own understanding of God's will and God's way.
Furthermore, I find the glorification of war in general to be offensive
and, as a Christian, contrary to the teachings of Jesus. That's why I
find it so dissettling to hear people proclaim their allegiance to
Christ on the one hand and their commitment to seemingly endless war and
violence on the other. Whether it's the war in Vietnam, or Granada, or
Panama, or Kosovo, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, wars--even if instigated in
the name of righting a wrong, such as the U.S. attempt to capture or
kill Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan following 9/11--always
degenerate into cycles of violence which catches up innocent
noncombatants, women and children, and so-called militants in the same
net. War is a blunt instrument that should rarely--probably never--be
used, and certainly not in any scenario other than self-defense, yet it
is often the first choice among those who see themselves as patriots.
Too few people realize or care, before it's too late, that the costs of
war are not just the suffering and death of innocent civilians in the
war de jure, but also the soldiers on both sides of the conflict,
the region that has to handle the refugees, the families of those on
both sides killed and maimed, and the poor who suffer from lack of
services because the resources of the nation are geared toward violence
rather than meeting needs in a context of peace. How long will it be
before the U.S. is punished for the blood of Baghdad and Al Anbar, Kabul
and Kandahar, just as Israel was punished for the blood of Jezreel?
Psalm 85 (first published 25 July 2004)
In the world of Star Trek, the Klingons are portrayed as the most
warlike group of people in the Federation. Modeled on the ancient
city-state of Sparta, Klingons live for war and hope to die in battle.
When the Klingon Empire is at peace, it hardly seems to know what to do
with itself, and its people seem lost. When most people imagine an ideal
political situation, it is not the Spartans or the Klingons that come to
mind. Most people imagine a realm characterized by peace, prosperity, and
justice, one like that described in today's reading from the Psalms. The
psalm is set in a time when God seems to be withholding blessing from the
people. How long will this period of disfavor last? asks the psalmist.
God has punished and restored the people in the past; is this yet another
swing of the undulating pendulum of favor and judgment? The psalmist
trusts that God will again restore the fortunes of those who are faithful,
and he describes what he believes God's reign will be like. "Steadfast
love and faithfulness will meet; justice and peace will kiss." In the
psalmist's idealized world, God reigns over a faithful people, and God's
rule is characterized by steadfast love, faithfulness, justice, and peace.
There is no mention here of military might or victory over one's enemies.
I'm particularly taken by the expression "justice and peace will kiss."
Justice and peace go hand in hand, both in the ideal kingdom and in any
nation that truly wants what is best for its people. The Spartan/Klingon
model of peace by military might is an illusion, or better, a delusion.
Many, perhaps most, of the conflicts in the world today are fueled by
injustice, even when they also have ethnic or religious facets as well.
People of one ethnic or religious group have superior social status to
another group, so rebellion ensues. The lower classes see no hope of
advancing beyond their current status by ordinary means, so war breaks
out. Masses of people living in slums look at the riches of their rulers
and see injustice, so they resort to terrorism to try to right the wrongs.
Peace at the point of a sword is oppression. A system that guarantees one
social group privilege is structural injustice. An army that consistently
brutalizes an already subjugated people is state-sponsored terrorism.
One of the most frightening aspects of our modern world is the fact that
many people--privileged and oppressed alike--see nothing wrong with a more
or less constant state of war. The U.S. spends hundreds of billions of
dollars a year on the machinery of war (quite a bit less on the personnel,
but that's a matter for another time), and its leaders, Democrat and
Republican alike, seem surprised that it doesn't result in peace! At the
same time, Osama bin Laden and his ilk plot the murders of hundreds of
innocent people, and they can't seem to understand why each bomb only
makes their opponents more determined! Both group-sponsored and
state-sponsored terrorism are unjust and an affront to the cause of God,
which is the cause of peace. It is time for the people of God to stand up
and say to all who support violence, "Enough!" Only when justice and
peace kiss will we be on our way to the ideal world we all dream about.
Colossians 2:6-15, (16-19) (first published 25 July 2004)
When a forlorn Frenchwoman appears at the door of a house in a small
village in nineteenth century Denmark, the women of the house take her in
and offer her a position as housekeeper and cook. After several years,
her fortunes change, and the Frenchwoman prepares a sumptuous feast for
her employers and for the entire religious community that lives in the
village. In the process, the people learn that life is something to be
enjoyed with friends and family, and Christianity is not incompatible with
happiness. The religious community portrayed in Babette's Feast is
not unlike many religious communities today. In their efforts to remain
unstained by the world, people sometimes go too far, equating joy with sin
and following rules that seem designed more for punishment than
sanctification. The church at Colossae had members who didn't understand
the nature of the freedom that Christ offers his followers. They were in
danger of being "taken captive" by philosophy, human tradition, and the
"elemental spirits of the universe." Some Greek philosophers of the day
taught that everything in the universe was made up of fire, air, water,
and earth. These fundamental elements also symbolized esoteric truths
about the powers that ruled the universe. Only by living one's life
according to certain rules and principles could one hope to remain in
harmony with the ruling powers. The author contrasts his view of
Christianity with this one. If Christ contains the whole fullness of
deity in himself, then there is no reason to fear elemental spirits.
Neither the Jewish custom of circumcision nor Greek demands that certain
food and drink be avoided have any hold over Christians. Christianity is
a religion that should be characterized by joy, openness, and interaction
with the world, while at the same time its followers are called on to
avoid unprofitable excess in all areas of life. It's easy to feel moral
superiority to people who don't live their lives according to the same
rules that you do, but following God is not about rules. Following God is
not a matter of eating and drinking, it's not a matter of what words you
say or avoid saying, and it's not a matter of how frequently you attend
church or engage in prayer. Following God should be something that people
do out of joy, not out of fear or obligation. From time to time we all
need to examine our lives to make sure that we are not harming
ourselves--or our witness--by our tendency toward self-limitation.
Luke 11:1-13 (first published 25 July 2004)
Prayer is a funny thing. We use it to praise God, and we use it to curse our enemies. We ask God to intervene on behalf of those in need, and we ask God for favors that will benefit us at others' expense. We thank God for our blessings, but we rarely ask for wisdom in using those blessings for the sake of God's kingdom, since we already have other plans. Maybe prayer isn't what's funny after all: it's the way we pray that's funny. Abraham Lincoln, in his Second Inaugural Address, noted the irony of both Union and Confederate partisans praying to the same God and asking for victory in battle. During World War I, many German and British soldiers along the Western front celebrated Christmas Day, 1914, together in No Man's Land, singing carols and praying. Today we pray for the success of our soldiers fighting in Iraq. Undoubtedly the terrorists who hijacked the planes on September 11 prayed for success the morning of their attack. It is obvious that God can't grant all these prayers, since so many are mutually exclusive. It is equally obvious that many of them should never have been prayed. We need to hear again the words of Jesus, who gave his disciples a model to use when praying. The version of the Lord's Prayer in Luke is shorter than that found in Matthew, but the essentials are the same. Jesus told his disciples to praise God, to pray for God's kingdom to be established (which I view as equivalent to the Matthean expansion that asks that God's will be accomplished), to meet the immediate needs of the disciples, to forgive the disciples' sins, and to protect the disciples from times of trial. I want to focus on points two and three, establishing God's kingdom and meeting immediate human needs. The problem with many of our prayers today is that we focus so much on our wants that we forget to ask God to meet our needs, much less to establish God's kingdom. Furthermore, how often do we consider that if God grants our wishes, God's greater purposes might be thwarted? This applies on both an individual and a global scale. If God gives me that promotion at work, will someone whose family is in greater need suffer? If God gives our soldiers in Iraq victory, what are the long-term repercussions for justice and peace in the region? It's hard not to pray for the things we really, really want, and I don't think it's necessarily wrong to do so. However, our focus should clearly be on what we need, and even more on what the world as a whole needs, that is, that God's kingdom be established. If we will concentrate on praying for those two items, maybe we'll realize that having our basic needs met and seeing God's kingdom established will become what we really, really want.