By Divine Authority
When I worked in retail, there was a coworker of mine who scheduled his lunch around when Gunsmoke was on TV. He didn’t dictate what was on the television in the breakroom, but if it wasn’t on or if nobody was watching, he would get it to Gunsmoke. A classic western, with all the tropes and characters, but by no means the only representation of the idea. Something about the sheriff, the old west lawman, the harbinger of justice and violence has long appealed to the American psyche. Whether you are watching The Rifleman (starring Chuck Connors), Longmire, Yellowstone, or any other show from the western genre, these are similar themes. We want to do what is right, even if it makes us some sort of outlaw. Some of you will be familiar with the Disney film National Treasure in which Nic Cage plays a man who decides to steal the Declaration of Independence. Was this the right thing to do? Maybe. Was it legal? Definitely not.
So, what happens when these questions of right and wrong get an added layer of trouble? What happens when God gets brought up as a talking point or reason why? We end up with some pretty problematic interpretations of Scripture is what happens. These interpretations are still having a profound impact on some of the oppressed and powerless in our society today because the standards set by these doctrines end up being pervasive.
Questions about justice and what is right have long been a part of the discussion surrounding ethics questions. Enslaving other people has never been right, but there have been times when it was legal. I feel safe in saying what is right is not always legal and what is legal is not always right. Remember- it was the puritan leaders who banned Christmas in the United States probably because of their understanding of sola scriptura, a doctrine still shared by many modern faith traditions. Scripture contains truth, but when Scripture is cherry picked or twisted, it is easy to end up in a situation where harm is being done rather than a furthering of God’s kingdom. An accusation of weaponizing Scripture is often included in analysis of the comments made by many a faith tradition, including our own United Methodist church. We do not always get it right, but we continue to respond to the Holy Spirit in hopes that we may one day do so both individually and collectively as the body of Christ.
Today I want to dig in, briefly, to two moral questions that come up from time to time.
The first is if there is ever such a thing as a just war. At a glance, I would say that serving the prince of peace would be a pretty good starting point that war is not the answer. I will forever recall the words of Hawkeye Pierce, as played by Alan Alda in M*A*S*H as being some of the most poignant on why war is such a terrible, horrific, cruel thing. If God wants a prosperous, good future for us, how could it ever include war? Well, some scholars and theologians set some parameters based on some older parameters with ongoing debate that could result in new parameters. This is called the just war theory. Critiques for these parameters have come from two sides. One that it is not pacifist enough- there is never truly a good reason to go to war. The other is that the standards are too strict. So long as war serves a nation’s interests, it is a good enough reason to go to war.
The four modern criteria for a jus ad bellum are as follows:
1. Competent authority
2. Probability of success
3. Last resort
4. Just cause
Each of these has some further explanation and understanding, but to sum it up, a duly constituted public authority (no dictators or kings), with a moral reason (no ego or capitalistic gains), who has attempted peace (no intentionally angering or provoking other nations), and who thinks the loss of life will not be so significant (no creating cannon fodder or continuing to lose lives when there is no chance of victory) may have cause to go to war. You cannot invade other people. You cannot take their land just because you want it or want control of it. If you can picture an old-timey villain doing it in a western, it’s probably a bad thing morally. The cattle baron that comes in and takes the widow’s lands because he has the power and firearms to do so? It’s not just and it’s not right. When one nation does that to another, it’s not right. And our Scripture does give us some instances where God has promised land to the chosen people, Israel, but there are already people living there who will need to leave or be defeated for them to enter into the promised land. Does this mean that God backs the idea of pushing people out of their land for the gain of a certain group?
Let’s dig into the second connected moral question for today: Manifest Destiny. When I was first taught this in school it was all about how people viewed America as the land of freedom and promise. There was so much space and elbow room! And people were destined to stretch all the way from the colonies over to the west coast. Except, there were already people living on this land. Generations of complex and beautiful societies that differed from those brought over by Eurocentric settlers already existed in the Americas until there was an intentional genocide and ongoing atrocities perpetrated against those who were already here. Their plight is not my own, but it does not have to be mine for me to witness it. Again, using westerns as are measuring stick, if you can picture the villain killing off a group of people just for existing or because they are in the way, perhaps this is not the right thing to do.
Today we do not always see the threat of war as being unusual or even talk of genocide being rare, but I find that so often that threat comes with the unwritten understanding that the powerful are still trying to enforce their will on those who do not agree or comply with them. This can be nation against nation or even corporation against employee. Those with power do not always use it to do justice, love mercy, or walk humbly. Ideas like manifest destiny may have evaporated, but new anti-indigenous or anti-immigrant rhetoric has taken its place. Are these things right or wrong? I have strong opinions that they are not right. That God’s will never includes harming others or forcing them to comply with a way of life that you would choose for them. Moral questions, especially when faith gets involved, can end up feeling like a gray area because we do not wish to condemn, but Christ tended to side with the ostracized, oppressed, and outcast. Christ brought freedom and choice, not coercion or force.
But what do you think? How does your faith answer the questions of:
1. Is war ever justified?
2. Can a land be destined for a certain group of people by divine authority?
