Borg and Crossan (“The First Paul”) point out that Caesar was the “Son of God” long before Jesus was. In fact all the names we use to describe Jesus were already being for Augustus: Lord, Savior of World, Almighty God, Master, King and so on. Paul and the early Christians used these names quite intentionally. They were saying something about who Jesus was, and was not. Saying “Jesus is Lord” was high treason. It meant, very clearly, “Caesar is not.”
Rome’s program was clear. Religion > Violence/War > Victory > Peace. Peace through violent conquest and domination. Augustus prayed to Athena who told him to go to war. His continual victories were verification of the divine hand upon him. Consequently, he built numerous temples to her, with the Nike in her hand. The god really being worshiped was victory.
The end product was the Pax Romana, a peace built upon violence: war, torture, domination. Crucifixion, a tool for dominance and control by days-long excruciating torture, was reserved for disobedience to the state. It sent a signal to those who defied Rome. That Jesus was crucified, and not beheaded, or that he did not die of natural causes, is vitally important to early Christian theology. It is rather the point. Jesus stands against Rome’s program of peace through violent victory and cruel domination.
Jesus’ program is different: Religion > Non-violence > Justice > Peace. Peace will come through love, concern for the poor. There can be no peace without justice. And no justice without peace. Peace cannot come through bloodshed, which always leads to more bloodshed. Peace comes through justice for the poor, the orphan, widow, alien, the outcast.
Which program do we believe in? Peace through bombs or peace via working for justice? If we believed in Jesus’ program, more of our budget would go to foreign aid than “defense” adventures like Iraq (which spawned a new wave of young terrorists to fight the Great Satan.) If we dropped more food supplies than bombs we might be the Christian country we say we are. I have a hard time seeing Jesus green lighting our budget priorities.
Americans surveyed typically say 15-25% of our budget goes to foreign aid. Actually it’s less than one third of a percent. In 1970 the richest countries agreed to give .7% of their budget in foreign aid to developing countries. This has never materialized in the US. And the money we do give doesn’t serve the poor for the most part. The largest recipient is Israel at $7 million a day. Yes, per day. We bankrolled Gaza, the wall, the flotilla debacle. Most of our foreign said goes to fund foreign militaries.
On the other hand 23% of our budget is “defense.” Defense has become an industry, at best. A religion at worst.
If we buy into Rome’s program of peace through violent victory, with religious fervor at the heart, we will go the way of Rome. Whoever lives by the sword dies by the sword, a great man once said.
I wish we’d try Jesus’ program. Our military already delivers food, sometimes. It’s called counterinsurgence. It’s a military strategy based on “winning their trust.” What if this turned out to be the plan most like what Jesus had in mind? What if it turned out to be the future of our military? The military people I’ve known have a heart for this. They’ve seen too much. Peace through kindness. It would be a heck of a lot harder to recruit suicide bombers to attack those who are feeding them, building their schools, fighting malaria, and other diseases.
We are on a bad path, but we are not beyond redemption. The first step will be our own conversion to Jesus’ way. A conversion of the Pax Americana.
Of course, if we think that violent victory is our salvation nothing will happen. We can worship Athena, Nike, Mars/Ares. But if we allow counterinsurgence to become a greater and greater portion of our military’s agenda, we will act our way into a more humane way of being in the world. And maybe we could actually become a more Christian country, a country that actually believes the Sermon on the Mount.
June 12, 2010 at 3:20 pm
Mike, while I believe that you are correct in your thinking regarding what Jesus calls us to do, I also believe that one must put forth all the facts regarding things. While the U.S. does indeed spend 23% of its budget on “defense”, it also spends 39% on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. While our foreign aid is abysmal, our domestic care of the widow, orphan, and impoverished dwarfs our defense spending by 16%. Show me a church that is willing to spend 39% of its budget taking care of neighbors and community projects in its own back yard. I know some exist, but they are very, very rare.
June 12, 2010 at 11:35 pm
Kevin,
Thanks for your comment.
I was addressing foreign aid, not domestic, but since we’re on the topic…
I’m delighted that we have these programs which some call socialist programs. They provide a safety net for the elderly and the poor. However, I have concerns:
The 39% figure is misleading since most of that comes from trust income. Very little of income tax goes toward these important programs.
While this is noble, its giving to our own. Our country’s tithe is foreign aid IMHO. And there we are put to shame by our unchurched Lutheran Scandinavian brothers and sisters: http://masbury.wordpress.com/2008/09/29/what-percent-of-us-budget-goes-to-foreign-aid/
The only way the churches will get to 39% is to ditch paid clergy and lay staff (50% of most churches’ budgets) and their buildings (30% of many churches’ budgets).
None of this changes my agony about our bombing the hell out of the world, in the name of safety, national security, the war on terror…
Mike
3.
June 13, 2010 at 7:52 am
Mike, my intent is not to change your mind regarding bombing others for the sake of peace. On this, we generally agree. My intent is to broaden the view of what the U.S. does in regards to caring for others. As I stated before, our foreign aid is abysmal, but we still have things in place to take care of the poor, elderly, and downtrodden. Yes, much of that money comes out of a trust, but it came out of tax payer pockets to begin with, and it still does. Sure, it’s not our “income tax” per se, but how does it feel to write that self-employment tax at the beginning of each quarter? A duck by any other name is still a duck, and it’s still cash outflow by the U.S. government paid by you, me, and anyone else who works.
I still find it quite interesting that in your original post and in your response to me, you (and I to some extent) are comparing our country to a church. You even went so far as to say that “we call ourself a Christian country” and “our tithe is foreign aid.” I hope such comments are simply being made as an analogy, because if they are serious in nature, then such things are evidence for my hypothesis that the Christian right and Christian left are pretty much two peas in a pod, but they have different emphasis. Both want a government and a nation that are Christian; yet we know from history how well such governments turn out. Such talk takes the church out of its role of being “salt and light”, and instead, turns in into an institution seeking power. That always turns out bad.
As far as I can tell, God quit the theocracy thing in favor of a much different model–a model of His Kingdom not based in worldly power, but in the power of His people working and permeating in the world no matter who has the earthly authority–being in the world but not of it. Seems to me that the Christian right and the Christian left are starting to be a little too much in and of it by their desires to make the government do as they think it should.
June 13, 2010 at 10:02 am
Kevin,
Enjoying vacation, but before we head out for church:
I pay FICA, but the idea is I get it all back when I’m older. (A fleeting hope.) I still don’t see this as giving. It’s enlightened self-interest IMHO.
I believe your analysis of the left and right is correct. Both see the US as the city on the hill. We may be the only country that has such a religious view of our government, excepting Israel. Left and right are the same problem on different clothes. I don’t view country as church. It is analogy, and a dangerous one in this environment of civil religion.
Looking to government for salvation is foolhardy. Ps 146:3.
But holding government accountable is prophetic. I King 21:16-19.
June 13, 2010 at 12:04 pm
LOL to the comments regarding FICA. So true. However, FICA also provides income for folks who suffer loss and disability, if I am correct. And as with any insurance, the idea is to draw from a pool. Some get back what they put in. Some of us will be left out in the cold. Talk about a justice issue: what happens when someone is promised SS, Medicare, etc. when they are choosing whether or not to pay in, and government mismanages the funds?
Here’s another question for you (mind you, I don’t have the answer): if holding the government accountable is prophetic, what standard do we hold the government accountable to? Our own Christian standards–even though the nation should not be called Christian? To the standards of philosophical ethics? And which one at that? To a more Judeo-Christian standard based upon the laws in the OT? What’s a New Testament orientation towards doing such a thing?
He, he. Hope you don’t read that last line of questioning before leaving. Have a wonderful, restful vacation.
June 13, 2010 at 1:04 pm
New Testament orientation. Well, we have Romans 13. But I always read Rom 13 in light of the fact that Paul spent much time in jail for defying Roman authority. And we was most likely executed by the state. Even saying “Jesus is Lord” was high treason.
I say we hold the government to a Broad Judeo-Christian ethic of justice (not a literal adherence to every puirty code). In the end we have a democracy, and people wil vote. But we still speak out for justice and peace.