In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

WJWD

What Jesus wouldn’t do:

The hardest saying of Jesus and perhaps the most controversial in our post–Sept. 11 world must be: “Love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you.” Let’s be honest: How many churches in the United States have heard sermons preached from either of these Jesus texts in the years since America was viciously attacked on that world-changing September morning in 2001? Shouldn’t we at least have a debate about what the words of Jesus mean in the new world of terrorist threats and pre-emptive wars?

Christ commands us to not only see the splinter in our adversary’s eye but also the beams in our own, which often obstruct our own vision. To name the face of evil in the brutality of terrorist attacks is good theology, but to say they are evil and we are good is bad theology that can lead to dangerous foreign policy. Christ instructs us to love our enemies, which does not mean a submission to their hostile agendas or domination, but does mean treating them as human beings also created in the image of God and respecting their human rights as adversaries and even as prisoners. The words of Jesus are either authoritative for Christians, or they are not. And they are not set aside by the very real threats of terrorism. The threat of terrorism does not overturn Christian ethics.

This is from a compelling excerpt from a book titled “God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It” by Jim Wallis. Read the rest.


7 thoughts on WJWD

  1. You may not know it, but you are proving to be a great silent resource for me, Lauren. I redid that comment above as a poem for my mom who knew about that stuff. You were a part of that. Thank you from the bottom of my soul

  2. If the Church preached to love thy Arab neighbour and held colletions to buy the Taleban and Iraqis clothes, do you think this would prove popular? American churchgoers are generally bigots and the least “christian” (used semantically not religiously) people in the US. Every churchgoer I met in the US’s bible belt was racist, homophobic and generally vile and ignorant. I do admit I did stay with some rather unsavoury people, so my experience is probably not a true reflection of *all*.

    Remember that these are also the areas that provide most of the young men who serve in the military and it suddenly means the Church is fulfilling a role it filled similar to the days of the religious crusades or in the Inquisition.

    An important point for consideration. Terrorism is non-State, by its very definition. The wars were no Just because they were wars against States, not clampdowns on terrorists. Continuing from that, is the consideration that the wars are supposed to make Americans safer, but has it?
    One argument for, is that there’s been no 11 Sept-style incidents since 2001. Yet that works both ways, as there has never been a serious terrorist incident in the previous three centuries of US existence. Any terrorist attack is likely to hit a major US city (DC, NYC) and in truth most Americans were very reactionary and overblown in their reaction to the WTC falling down.

    But it was great imagery. Very evocative, very dramatic. It is great propaganda material, even for the Church.

    That said when I went to Xmas Mass at my local Catholic shindig here in little ol’ Britain, we did say prayers for the Iraqis. But then we are jolly nice chaps.

  3. Monjo said: One argument for, is that there’s been no 11 Sept-style incidents since 2001. Yet that works both ways, as there has never been a serious terrorist incident in the previous three centuries of US existence.

    minor point: many folks consider the OK City bombing of 1995 a serious terrorist incident

  4. feh. sorry for that HTML spaz again. but i think the link works.

    Ms. Lauren i know you are very busy & have many many maaaany more important things to attend to but i was sorta wondering if you had ever considered re-introducing the preview function again?

    … asked in a very quiet & humble voice, full of respect for our host & her busy life

  5. My church (Unitarian) did both things, the Sunday after Sept. 11, when the place was packed with frightened people.

  6. Alot of good points by everyone here. The Oklahoma City Bombing was a horrible attack on Americans as well – innocent children as well as adults were killed – all by American Timothy McVeigh – yet he and the group he was a member of did not become our instant enemies – their homes weren’t invaded and bombed- why? Forgive as Jesus says because McVeigh was one of theirs (Christian)?

    The Taliban attacked the WTC – the entire Arab and Muslim world becomes our enemy due to a small fanatic group – so we attack Afghanistan – and somehow end up in a war in Iraq – with Americans dying ….. so I ask not only why but how???? No forgiveness because they weren’t Christian and we tar everyone with the same brush stroke?

    Strangely enough – or maybe not so strangely – it’s the Timothy McVeigh’s of the world – the red belt section of the U.S. that reelected GWB – those who actually dealt with and were greatly affected by the attack of the WTC – there were 5 deaths in my town alone and I live in NJ – the Eastern and Western coasts – voted for Kerry.

    The point I see everyone missing is – we WERE attacked – the WTC was attacked – and it was when GWB was in office. If he couldn’t prevent an attack then – what made everyone think he could prevent another now?

Comments are currently closed.