a conversation that needs to happen, but won’t

a conversation that needs to happen, but won’t

Comments 0 Comment

From today’s New York Times: Bush Vows Not to Negotiate on Iraq Timetable

A defiant President Bush vowed today not to negotiate with Congress about setting a date for withdrawing American troops from Iraq, and he said the American people would blame lawmakers if there is any delay in approving money for the war effort.

“Now, some of them believe that by delaying funding for our troops, they can force me to accept restrictions on our commanders that I believe would make withdrawal and defeat more likely,” Mr. Bush said. “That’s not going to happen. If Congress fails to pass a bill to fund our troops on the front lines, the American people will know who to hold responsible.”

I believe, I want to believe, that Mr. Bush believes he is doing what is best for our country by “staying the course” in Iraq, but sincerity and good intentions are not enough. By refusing to bend at all and by summarily dismissing legislation setting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq passed by both the House and the Senate, Mr. Bush is not merely defying the Democratically-controlled Congress, he is defying the intent of the Constitution. The Constitution intends a trilateral sharing of power, a system of checks and balances, so that one person, one office, even one branch of government will not act alone, unilaterally establishing national policy.

But this administration wants to pursue its war as it sees fit, without counsel, without oversight, without negotiation, without compromise. The bills passed by Congress and the bill which may eventually reach the president’s desk should provide, not an ultimatum, but a starting point for conversation, a conversation that could lead to a policy more closely reflecting the will of the people. But this administration has already decided by itself what is best for the people.

“If we cannot muster the resolve to defeat this evil in Iraq, America will have lost its moral purpose in the world. And we will endanger our citizens, because if we leave Iraq before the job is done, the enemy will follow us here.”

We have already lost our moral purpose in the world. The invasion of Iraq four years ago was a preemptive strike; an act of war in response to a perceived threat, not to any provocation; quite simply an act of aggression, illegal and immoral. The United States and its allies invaded a sovereign nation without just cause, and the immorality of that act has only been compounded by the immense suffering of the Iraqi population.

We cannot unring that bell and the situation on the ground in Iraq today is complex and unpredictable. The daily violence despite — or because of — the presence of American troops is horrendous, and it is almost certain that the violence without the presence of American troops would be even worse. But as a moral issue, the war does not become any more moral by its elongation. The immoral war is still immoral, and the only way to redress that failing and to reclaim any moral redemption is to cease and desist … to leave Iraq.

Post Views: 974
beauty out of place

beauty out of place

Comments 1 comment

A floating rose

The red rose is out of place, floating on the surface of the bay, but even there holds our attention with its beauty … just as the one the rose remembers is out of place, not being here, but even so still holds our attention.

Post Views: 896
ten steps

ten steps

Comments 0 Comment

Worth checking out: Ten Steps to Restore the United States’ Moral Authority: A Common Sense Agenda for the 110th Congress

This document posted on the Human Rights Watch website provides a good summary of the ways the conduct of the war on terrorism has undermined the consistent application by the United States of basic principles of human rights and suggests a specific agenda for restoring our moral compass. Signatories include Amnesty International, Physicians for Human Rights, the Justice and Witness Ministries of the United Church of Christ, and close to twenty other religious and human rights organizations.

Post Views: 865
an easter prayer

an easter prayer

Comments 1 comment

Wow! That was my reaction on reading this Easter letter written by the chair of our congregation’s board of deacons. I knew immediately I had to share it with all of you. Hear his prayer … and, if you will, make it your own!

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of laborers, the genius of scientists, the hope of its children.” Dwight D. Eisenhower, five-star general and the thirty-fourth president of the United States.

Religious people seldom have difficulty finding a scriptural basis for engaging in conflict. The Old Testament is a history of nations in conflict, and God was on the side of the faithful. The lesson of our Savior, however, is to bridge differences, to trample prejudices, and to bury animosities. To the surprise of most everyone, Jesus came not to lead his people in war, but as the Prince of Peace. Jesus died on a cross, not to defeat the Romans, but to bring the Kingdom of God.

As spring awakens the earth, let us be prayful and courageous. Let us pray that our eyes be opened. Let us see the world as it is and as it yearns to be. Let us pray for understanding, reconciliation, and the end of animosities, some of which have lasted for hundreds of years. Let us pray for ourselves. Let us pray for our neighbors and our enemies. Let us temper our passions and tend to the patient labors of peace.

Post Views: 922
hateful?

hateful?

Comments 0 Comment

From a Christian blog I read:

General Peter Pace’s comments calling homosexuals acts as immoral, and Senator Sam Brownback’s comments backing the General up are nothing less than hateful …

Grace is not about an indifferent acceptance of everything, but about an unconditional love for everyone. Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, came under fire this week for his characterization of homosexual behavior as “immoral.” The remarks may indeed have been ill-advised and unnecessary, and probably unwise and unloving to pin the “immoral” label on a group of people with a public statement like that. But I would not call the remarks “hateful.”

I would not hesitate to label acts of pride or envy or greed or bias or abuse as immoral, when in facts our churches are full of people who are prideful and envious and greedy and biased and abusive. To say so is not to be hateful, but to witness to the kind of life God desires for all people. The purpose of grace is not to condone but to transform.

All this is to say that well-meaning and humble and faithful Christians disagree about the “immorality” of homosexual acts. Some in good conscience and with love for their neighbors and with a genuine desire to follow Jesus affirm the expression of same-sex love as acceptable in the sight of God. Others in good conscience and with love for their neighbors and with a genuine desire to follow Jesus believe that obedience to God means that the only acceptable expression of sexual intimacy is between a woman and a man in marriage.

The issue is complex and, to state the obvious, is tearing our churches apart. I believe we need a healthy dose of charity and a whole lot of love and patience in dealing with each other as we work this through and try to do our best to follow where Jesus leads. We need to listen to each other, try to understand each other, acknowledge each other’s conclusions, even where we disagree, so that the church and its witness will not be destroyed by disagreement over this issue. To brand someone who disagrees as hateful doesn’t help …

Post Views: 780
on the subject of the war in iraq

on the subject of the war in iraq

Comments 0 Comment

I reprint for you here an excerpt of the remarks Jim Wallis will make at a Christian peace rally to be held this evening in Washingon, D.C. His words are powerful and passionate and perceptive and faithful to the gospel of Jesus. As Christians, we must discern and root out the fear in our own hearts and minds, let it be rooted out as the love of God fills us more and more. As Christians, we take no sides, nor enlist God to defend “our side,” but do our best to put ourselves on God’s side …

For all of us here tonight, the war in Iraq has become a matter of faith.

By our deepest convictions about Christian standards and teaching, the war in Iraq was not just a well-intended mistake or only mismanaged. THIS WAR, FROM A CHRISTIAN POINT OF VIEW, IS MORALLY WRONG – AND WAS FROM THE VERY START. It cannot be justified with either the teachings of Jesus Christ OR the criteria of St. Augustine’s just war. It simply doesn’t pass either test and did not from its beginning. This war is not just an offense against the young Americans who have made the ultimate sacrifice or to the Iraqis who have paid such a horrible price. This war is not only an offense to the poor at home and around the world who have paid the price of misdirected resources and priorities. This war is also an offense against God.

And so we are here tonight, very simply and resolutely, to begin to end the war in Iraq. But not by anger, though we are angry, and not just by politics, though it will take political courage. But by faith, because we are people of faith.

This service and procession are not just another political protest but an act of faith, an act of prayer, an act of nonviolent witness. Politics led us into this war, and politics is unlikely to save us by itself. The American people have voted against the war in Iraq but political proposals keep failing, one after the other.

I believe it will take faith to end this war. It will take prayer to end it. It will take a mobilization of the faith community to end it – to change the political climate, to change the wind. It will take a revolution of love to end it. Because this endless war in Iraq is based ultimately on fear, and Jesus says that only perfect love will cast out fear.

So tonight we say, as people of faith, as followers of Jesus, that the deep fear that has paralyzed the conscience of this nation, that has caused us to become the kind of people that we are not called to be, that has allowed us to tolerate violations of our most basic values, and that has perpetuated an endless cycle of violence and counter-violence must be exorcised as the demon it is – THIS FEAR MUST BE CAST OUT!

And to cast out that fear, we must act in faith, in prayer, in love, and in hope – so we might help to heal the fears that keep this war going. Tonight we march not in belligerence, or to attack individuals – even those leaders directly responsible for the war – or to use human suffering for partisan political purposes. Rather, we process to the White House tonight as an act of faith, believing that only faith can save us now.

Post Views: 946
keeping things in perspective

keeping things in perspective

Comments 1 comment

The blood is in the water. Democrats (joined now by Republican John Sununu) want Alberto Gonzales dismissed from his job as attorney general for his abrupt firing of eight US attorneys.

There may well be justification in condemning the political nature of the firings, but it is hard for me to get too worked up about this issue. An attorney general motivated by politics? And that is a revelation? It may be sad, but true, that the US attorneys do work at the whim of the executive branch and decisions about hiring and firing will be politically motivated.

It is hard for me to get excited about this crusade against Gonzales, because it is transparently a matter of political “gotcha” and of gaining, or at least appearing to gain, the moral “highground.”

Consider the cost of Gonzales’ actions. Eight undoubtedly capable and well-intentioned public servants out of a job … but I would guess not long out of a job. And yet another blow to the sagging edifice of democracy by yet another exercise of executive unilateralism.

Compare the costs of this unilateral action with the costs of another virtually unilateral action: the invasion of Iraq. You cannot compare the two! You cannot compare the fallout of a squabble over politics with the fallout of a war!

Heads must roll over the firing of eight attorneys, but who shall bear the responsibility for an unwarranted, unprecedented, illegal invasion of a sovereign nation without provocation? Who shall bear responsibility for the thousands of American lives and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives this war has cost?

That is something to get worked up about!

Post Views: 818
the great moral issues of our time

the great moral issues of our time

Comments 0 Comment

I quote below a portion of Jim Wallis’ response to James Dobson’s characterization of the “great moral issues of our time.” Dobson coauthored a letter to the National Association of Evangelicals objecting to their inclusion of climate change among the issues they have chosen to address as leaders of the evangelical Christian movement.

Dobson named the”great moral issues” as “the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children.” … I believe the sanctity of life, the integrity and health of marriages, and the teaching of sexual morality to our children are, indeed, among the great moral issues of our time. But I believe they are not the only great moral issues. As many [other Christians] have been saying … the enormous challenges of global poverty, climate change, pandemics that wipe out generations and continents, the trafficking of human beings made in God’s image, and the grotesque violations of human rights, even to the point of genocide, are also among the great moral issues that people of faith must be – and already are – addressing.

What would you identify as the great moral issues of our time, the issues with which we, as people of faith, should be grappling?

Post Views: 864