Neo-Conservatism and Christian Faith

    A version of this was posted on the God's Politics blog earlier today.  In case you didn't see it there, here it is.

    There are some articles that one should not have to write.  Instead, the thesis they defend should be so obvious that setting it forward should be unnecessary.   However, there has been a remarkable degree the saber-rattling toward Iran over the last several months.  Further, a founding document of so-called neo-conservatism claimed that,  "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has” (and we all know how swimmingly our project in Iraq has gone!).  So, unfortunately, it does seem necessary to make and defend the obvious claim:  Christian faith is inconsistent with the central tenets of neo-conservativism.  Let me briefly summarize why this is so.
    First, perhaps the central goal of neo-conservativism is the use of US military force to impose a “pax Americana” around the world.  If one reads, for example, the Project for the New American Century, one finds something of an outline of how this it is to be accomplished.  It specifically recognized that we Americans are not likely to buy into such an ambitious foreign policy.  Instead, the document indicated that a catalyzing event, “like a new Pearl Harbor,” would be needed to empower the administration to push forward with this agenda.  The terrorist’s attacks of September 11th became that catalyzing event, and the war in Iraq was to be the initial step toward building the “pax Americana.”  Even if things were not going so badly, it is hard to see how Christians could affirm this aspect of the neo-con agenda.
    Second, for Christians, there are really only two broad ways in which to assess the use of military force.  Either, one embraces Christian Pacifism, or one embraces the Just War Theory.  Since, as already noted, neo-conservativism rests largely on a particular way of utilizing military force, we can see that neo-cons do not embrace Christian Pacifism.  So, for neo-conservativism to be acceptable to Christian faith, its vision must conform to the Just War criteria, but does it?  It doesn’t seem so.  First, there simply is no basis in the Just War criteria for going to war in attempt to establish a “pax Americana,” nor for “regime change.”  Neither of these constitutes a “just cause.”  Second, there is no basis for pre-emptive war within the Just War tradition of the sort envisioned by the neo-cons (oh, if an enemy has amassed troops on the border, it hardly matters who shoots first, but we had nothing like that in Iraq nor Iran).  Finally, it is likewise difficult to see how the US could be considered as having “legitimate authority” for attempting to establish a “pax Americana.”
    Third, while it might sound surprising, neo-conservatism simply does not take the concept of human sin and evil seriously enough.  It is surprising because it is often the neo-cons who point out that there is genuine evil in the world that must be confronted.  At the end of the day, however, neo-conservatives are simply too optimistic about our own goodness.  In other words, too much of the neo-conservative agenda rests on the belief that while “they” are bad, “we” are good.  Note, the issue here is not “moral equivalence,” i.e., no one need think of “us” as bad as “them.”  Rather, we only need recognize that no one should be entrusted with the sort of unilateral power implied by the neo-conservative dream.
    We, as followers of Jesus, should reflect on the differences between our calling to be imitators of Jesus and that to which the neo-cons would call us.  And, most of all, we need to recognize the incommensurability of the two ways of being in the world.

Comments

[dlw]

I'd also pitch the writings of church historian Gary Dorrien that examine the deliberate use of religious language in neo-conservative or neo-imperialistic writings.

dlw

[David Beasley]

What I really do not understand is how the Christian preachers and leadership in the various hierarchies of ecclisia -- church leadership in all denominations -- do not define and point out Christianity as you simply and straightforwardly have done and point out the difference in our everyday rubs with government, politics, and the world.

A child can understand the points you have presented yet adults in the church opt out of a simple clear picture which should and ought to define The Body under Christ and how this picture, this Scriture based picture in words works through human dedicated participation and devotion to Christ our leader.

[chcuk]

Good points and wonderments, folks:>)

[evagrius]

But you're forgetting- the U.S. is specially "blessed" by God to be a beacon of freedom and democracy to the world. The U.S. has a "moral obligation" to spread democracy in the world, even through the use of force. Why, it's just the moral equivalent of missionary work.

That, I belive, is what many, many Christians in the U.S. believe.

[chuck]

Yes, and it makes one wonder what is guiding these folks read of Scripture. Wander over to God's Politics and check out some of the comments to my piece there. I am getting a pretty thick skin, so disagreement and goofy comments don't bother me so much. What is very discouraging, though, is the remarkably bad theology driving so much of the commentary "christians" make--what's up, Evagrius? Sometimes, I think we are on the edge of another dark ages for religious faith. Thoughts?

[Don]

I like your article. Neo-conservativism is neither neo nor conservative and it certainly isn't aligned remotely with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

[evagrius]

It could be a dark age or it could be the birth pangs of something new.
I believe it was Raimundo Panikkar who pointed out that every advance in religious insight has always resulted in a resistance on the part of those holding on to an earlier insight.
I think many Christians really aren't Christians but monotheists of a certain stripe. They've replaced Yawheh with Christ but it's the old religion just in a new clothing.
In other words, the Incarnation of Christ and the Trinity, which are the very essence of Christianity, have been relegated to a back corner. The reason is simple; to truly believe in that is to accept a challenge to discover one's self as a mystery and others as an equal mystery, all called to be the living Image and Likeness of God, through the Son, Who is from the Father, in the Spirit.
It's not easy to accept that one is a mystery and that the question, " Who am I?" has no answer except in the silence of listening to the Spirit and participating, through grace, in the Incarnation, that is, of becoming a Child of God the Father.
A strict monotheism, such as that found in much of Christianity, Judaism and Islam always has a deep nihilism at its core. By strict monotheism, I mean the type of religion that denies we can have any true, real, ontological participation in the Life of the Trinity, ( which denial I call nihilism ). To merely be like God in a "moral sense" is no participation but an abject denial of the true nature of human being. Without participation, the "moral sense" loses its meaning and becomes legalism and moralism. Once it's shown how culturally dependent that moralism is through historical, psychological, social and political analysis, it becomes more and more difficult to defend it. One is reduced to making God a tyrant and we his abject slaves. So much for being called to be the children of God.
Sorry to be so long winded but I do think that this is the present situation.

[chuck]

No, thanks for being long-winded. That added a necessary theological perspective to the whole thing.
Don, thanks for coming by. I think I saw your comment of at GP. I don't often check in on the discussion, but did in order to offer a quick response of my own. Odd the basis some folks who claim to be Christian use for their arguments, eh?

[David Beasley]

I hope I can express this so as to be read as pertinent.

In the recent incident of tornado victims in Alabama an article came out speaking of another situation entirely. It was something like: Enterprise Buries Students Not Soldiers. Now actually having roots in that town, my Mom's family, I know that goegrphically it lies in the vicinity of a military helicoptor training school. Many in the town are military now a days it seems. A military man was called home from Iraq to his son's funeral in fact. But not only that connection is there but also there are quite a few military funerals due to Iraq and Afhgan war.

Now going beyond pastoral sensitivity I wonder about preaching the funerals and not only preaching the funerals but preaching my interpretation of Christ's message and the on going relationship of peace and goodwill towards humanity. In short preaching 'war is not the Christian answer' to soldiers and their families in wartime.

The message IS important beyond the excuse many use as pastoral sensitivity and do not preach it. To claim a definition of Christ and God and the Holy Spirit as evagrius has spoken about. I believe the depth of grief is all that can possibly be spoken to with sensitivity. I believe my sermon right now to the victims of war is simply sorrow and grief and a sincere effort in prayer and actions to help the survivors and to bring light to the root cause, the tares that choke the Gospel seed plants. Hellfire does not enter into it at all in my thoughts although Scripture goes there certainly... for me just sorrow and asking ourselves, 'how does God feel about us calling ourselves Christians and doing war, allowing an elected official who can be held accountable but having his will continue so long'. Especially when so many people are listening (?) in the grasslands in church every Sunday.

[evagrius]

David;

In the Orthodox Church, during Great Lent, there are services held during the week, usually on Wednesdays and Fridays. The Wednesday service is , ( at our church), known as the Pre-Sanctified Liturgy, a kind of combination of Vespers and the Sunday Liturgy, where participants receive Communion that has been sanctified on the previous Sunday.
There's a lot of bowing, kneeling and prtrastions that are only done during Lent.
( One of the prayers, said with a full prostration, ( the type seen on TV nowadays as done by Moslems who received it from Christians), is the prayer of St Ephraim;

Lenten Prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian
Lord and Master of my life, deliver me from the spirit of laziness, meddling, ambition and gossip.
Give me, Your servant, the spirit of prudence, humility, patience and love.
Lord and King, grant that I may see my sins and faults and not judge my brother, for You are blessed forever and ever. Amen.)

(Sorry for the digression. I think it a lovely prayer.)

After service we've been watching the film, The Gospel of John.

http://www.amazon.com/Gospel-John-Christopher-Plummer/dp/B0006Q93ZG

There's an episode in the Gospel where Jesus heals a Roman centurion's son.
I believe there's at least one other episode in the Gospels where Jesus heals a centurion's servant.

The centurions were from the occupying army, the Romans, who were often quite brutal in their treatment of the Jews.

There's not a hint that Jesus refused to heal on the basis that the centurions were evil and therefore deserved no compassion, no mercy.

Our modern centurions deserve the same.
The Roman ones had taken a vow to obey the Emperor. They did their duty.
Our modern ones have done the same, vowing to protect the country.

I would, rather than mention the immorality of war etc, point to the mercy of God. That, despite our own ignorance, selfishness, etc; there is still mercy flowing down from God as oil anointing our heads.

I would ask the congregants to pray for healing, healing of mind, body and spirit, healing for all. I would ask for healing as peace.

I think focusing on mercy, healing and peace are the salves these grieving families need.

[David Beasley]

evagrious
thanks for sharing a comfort to anger. That is one beautiful prayer.

[zero]

wonderments. neat word!

[David Beasley]

zero,
it must be a good spirit filled metaphysical certs of sorts.

[zero]

if words had motion, wonderment would frolic.

[chuck]

Frolicking wonderment, hmmmm.....

[David Beasley]

Late Winter born colts
Spring blue-grass meadows
Sunshine