John, I know what you mean. I'm inclined to see it simply as a problem of scale - I'm not that sold on the autonomy and inviolability of the nation state. But in the end, isn't it just a question of power? The oppressed are powerless, whether they are children or adults. The West is powerful and is in a position with respect to Iraq to intervene with reasonable prospect of success. Moreover, we often hear it said that as soon as American troops enter the country, the Iraqis, including the military, will rise up against Saddam - in other words, they will step up to the plate as soon as they think they've got a chance of hitting the ball (have I got the metaphor right?). But that remains to be seen.

By the way, is there any difference between a modern and a postmodern theology as far as these issues are concerned? I would have thought a postmodern theology would be less inclined to warmonger. Is that right?

andrew - i see what you are saying, but could there be a difference between a neighbour and a country? i would get involved with a neighbour who is abusing they children - but in a country we do not have only chlidren - but adults who can "take control" of the problems themselves. i am not sure we should jump in, when the people - who are mostly adults - are not steping up to the plate themselves. how do we figure in this fact with our desire for war?

pax
john

John, that sounds a bit fatalistic to me. If you knew that your neighbour was severely abusing his wife and kids and storing unusually large quantities of ammonium nitrate in his garden shed, would you simply pray that God would use that family for his purposes? Now maybe you're not perfect either; maybe you row with your wife; maybe you're driving your teenage kids up the wall with your ranting about their behaviour; maybe you give your colleagues at work a rough time; maybe you don't always remember to declare everything to the IRS. But does that disqualify you from intervening? Surely God could use you to bring justice to the oppressed and protect the innocent, and then sort you out at a later date? It would be better, of course, if in taking action against an unrighteous and dangerous neighbour you recognized the obligation to act righteously yourself.

andrew - thanks for the psalms thing - i never knew that.

i understand what you are saying about the idea of a "legitimate" government. i agree that all governments have problems, and that is my point - we can not see the govenment of iraq as "wrong" - at best we can see it as "different." we can not judge another, without having that same judgement falling upon us. our goal should be to pray that God uses iraq for his purposes - and if we get in the way, we are getting in the way of God.

pax

But John, surely there is no ideal legitimate authority - every national government is going to have some skeleton or other in its closet. Paul appears to have regarded Rome as a legitimate authority; but Rome was an idolatrous imperial power, established by force and invasion, which did not hesitate to intervene violently in the internal affairs of subject peoples (including Israel), which came to be perceived as a deeply anti-Christian power, and which ultimately came under divine judgment (Rev.18). It also seems to me that God can use the most unjust and illegitimate of nations to bring about his purposes if he wants to. What happens in the Bible, though, generally is that the unjust instrument of divine judgment also, sooner or later, finds itself judged.

By the way, it was Psalm 82:4 - maybe the author was using a Catholic Bible. The Psalm also has a universal perspective (verses 1 and 8) that may make it particularly relevant in the current circumstances, though usually these references to the poor and needy apply within the people of God.

jody - thanks for the post - but i think the author got some things wrong - first their mention of "the us government is a legitimate authority." is it? under the principles set forth by the article the author fergets that a revolution is not a "just war" - so, the "battle for independance" of america was "unjust" making america "non-legit." there is no way around it - the "founding fathers" were not a "legitmate authority." besides, would not the goverment of iraq be seen as a "legitimate authority?"

the other thing is the authors call to psalm 81:4 has nothing to do with the needy - the author mis-quoted. 81:4 says, "for this is required by the laws of israel; it is a law of the God of jacob." maybe they figured no one would look?

pax
john o'keefe

i must start this post with the reality that i was unable to hear the radio message on npr - it just did not work - i have heard it said by some that we have become a joke to the world - but many of the people i know who are not followers are very interested in what we have to say, but we are not saying anything. it is not that we need to speak with one voice, we just need to respect the voices of others; we do not. when we speak, our voices need to be consistant with scripture, not with the winds of politics - currently, we speak as a "republican conseratives" - and that is not the voice of the whole church. those who are the republican conseratives try to shout us down, when they should be lifting us up as another voice in the church.

pax

heard a great story yesterday on morning edition on npr about the church and why no ones listens to its proclamations any more

War Debate Highlights Doubts on Influence of Churches


As the United States contemplates going to war with Iraq, many church leaders are speaking out against military action. But some who believe war may be necessary say the church's influence over the American public is declining. NPR's Barbara Bradley Hagerty reports.

scroll down the page unitl you get to the story title is the link above

we live in world of terror - we need to look back at our lives and see what brought us to this point. what did we do to cause the problem - we need to be honest and realize that we did contribute to the problem. the idea that "we did nothing wrong" is wrong. we are at orange, and just one step from red -

pax
john

Martin Roth has written a review of A Mobile Church in E.P.I.C. Times:Moving Across Faith Community Borders." Take a look.

Like John, I read Kevin Miller's "PPM” (Proponents of postmodern ministry) rant. It’s unfortunate that the most significant thing said was contained in a mere two sentences.

Brian McLaren, an author of several books on postmodern ministry, writes in his latest that he has "a desire to move beyond a critique of modern ministry (a hobby that can be dangerously preoccupying)." And he and others are beginning to offer something creative and generative.

Instead of following up and providing insight on reconstructive ministry ideas (maybe he didn’t know enough to articulate this point) Mr. Miller sarcastically puts a negative spin on the creativity of this emerging faith community.

talk about not getting it, kevin miller seems to not the poll on his page - as of 2.4.03 the poll had the following:

46% take it seriously - while 3% don't see it in their church - interesting. 24% want us to get past it, while 16% see it as a passing fad - i wonder. could the ones that want us to "get past it" be moderns who are tired of our not wanting to go along with their flow -

pax
john

I'm afraid natives are going to have to accept the baton the immigrants pass you; monuments and all. It's unfortunate but it appears that current leadership just doesn't get it; and it doesn't appear that they are willing to consider the future of the next generation of leadership. They're so busy doing ministry indigenous to their time that they are essentially brain dead to your ideas and understanding of ministry. So be ready to inherit the monuments of modernism. Funny how history repeats itself.

speaking of elders, so i sit down tonight to read some fav sites, and................
my elder in blogging, Jordon, is gone.
do i cry, or eagerly await the "next"?

Fred you got to be an elder? man, i never made it that far. i usually was the one to run against the incubant deacon/board member. i played along with the ruse as long as i got to play dress up christianity so i would seemingly be accepted by "normal" folk.
i was once allowed to be a part(or is that apart) of the pastor search committe. i think i lost ground with my"peers" in this conservitive pentecostal church when i said i believed that the day of the shout was no longer relevant and we needed to too look for a teaching pastor. for the rest of my time at that church i was never asked to run again, never asked my opinion, never asked to speak.
it wasn't as if i were asking to sacrifice a goat, or filling the baptismal with jello. i wanted, and still do, to be taught. discipleship is such a foriegn concept to most churches. pastors seem to be more concerned with numbers than with the state of their sheep's souls.
on a more positive note: we have found a more progressive church in our area. thatt is no small feat when considering the size of our community(8000 people)
sometimes one voice is too much, other times it's not enough.

peace,
chuck