war...nuff said

I leave soon for a short-term excursion away from winter Manitoba to a warmer climate. It is only for a week. It is also during the Lenten season, but while I will not fast from the foods of the resort, I will attempt to fast for a week from the news cycle. So I need to post this before I go.  

It has been 16 days since, the USA "Department of War" began Operation Epic Fury, a war cry to invade Iran in what Donald Trump has called a short-term excursion that will last as “long as necessary,” or “4-5 weeks, or 6-8 weeks”, or “until the unconditional surrender of Iran” or “until all the objectives are achieved” or when Trump “feels it in his bones.” And if that is not confusing officials have listed over a dozen different rationales for the war other than a “feeling based on fact.”  

Regardless of the aim and objectives of war. The consequence of war are always the same. Soldiers die. Innocent victims die. Homes are destroyed. Living standards plummet. And, the enemy, whomever they are, grow in size and are ever more determined. War breeds war.

To this criticism, the American president posted on Truth Social, “Short term oil prices, which will drop rapidly when the destruction of the Iran nuclear threat is over. It is a very small price to pay for U.S.A, and World, Safety and Peace,” “ONLY FOOLS WOULD THINK DIFFERENTLY!”

Well, count me among the fools - the outcome of this made for Trump war is anything but Safety and Peace.

On March 5, th American President talked to ABC News chief Washington correspondent Jonathan Karl about the war. “I hope you are impressed,” he said. “How do you like the performance? I mean, Venezuela is obvious. This might be even better. How do you like the performance?”

Yesterday, while visiting the top of the CN tower with his mother, my nine year old grandson in the time it took the elevator to descend from top to bottom solved a rubrics cube. That was impressive. Dropping billions of dollar’s worth of first strike ammunitions on another country is sad.

Almost twenty years ago in the wake of the Afghanistan/Iraq gulf war, writing for the Pentecostal Testimony, the then flagship periodical of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada published what became arguably my most controversial piece. ^[1] . Tragically it is as relevant as ever. I am reposting it below.

---

Just War and the Burden of Proof

The college where I teach hosts an information day each semester for high school

students considering higher education at a Christian Liberal Arts College. During the

course of the day, students are offered an opportunity to engage the faculty of Biblical

and Theological studies in a question and answer session. I confess the session is a little unnerving because we seldom know in advance what the questions might be. In one session recently I was asked: “Is there such a thing as a "just war"? I paused wondering how could I respond in a sound byte with what can only be a nuanced answer. With measured emphasis I finally said, "No." Without missing a beat a colleague sitting behind me quickly retorted "Yes."

As I sit to write this column, I am struck with the same dilemma of how to respond to

such a question with an economy of words. Given the presence of Canadian troops in

places like Afghanistan, it is a question that needs to be addressed. Not only is it a matter of life and death for many, but it directly impacts the broader understanding of our relationship as Christian citizens with the state and the direct question who is our

neighbour? To find anything close to an official position by the PAOC on the issue of

war, we would need to go back almost 70 years.

In 1939 the PAOC issued the following resolution.

Whereas, We have accepted the Word of God as our rule of conduct and purpose to be governed by its Divine principles, and as our Assemblies for the past twelve years or more have always accepted and interpreted the New Testament teaching and principles as prohibiting Christians from shedding blood or taking human life. RESOLVED, That in time of persecution or ill-treatment at the hands of the enemy, we should not "avenge

ourselves," but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." (Rom, 12:19; Deut. 32.35) Neither shall (we) take up any weapon of destruction to slay another, whether in our own defense or in defense of others, for it is written, "Do no violence to no man." (See Luke 3:14; Matt. 26:52; John 18:36; 15-18,19). We should rather suffer wrong than do wrong.

RESOLVED, that all civil magistrates are ordained of God for peace, safety and for the welfare of the people (Romans 13:1-10). Therefore, it is our duty to be in obedience to all requirements of the Law that are not contrary to the Word of God. It is our duty to honor them, pay tribute, or such taxation as may be required without murmuring (Matthew 17:24-27) and show respect to them in all lawful requirements of

the Civil Government.^[2]

The resolution stopped short of our American counterparts in the Assemblies of God who almost two decades earlier declared, "… we cannot conscientiously participate in war and armed resistance which involves the actual destruction of human life."^[3]

Those resolutions were crafted in the tumultuous days preceding World Wars. Today most Christian ethicists on the subject of war have been swayed consciously or unconsciously by what the 4th century church father Augustine developed as rules of engagement for a "Just War." Briefly stated they have evolved into the following six principles. For an armed engagement to be "just" there must be a 1. Legitimate authority. Where the call to war is initiated by a legitimate nation and not a rogue state or individual. 2. Public declaration. Where conditions to avoid and/or end war are made clear. 3. Just intent. Where the actions of war intend to restore peaceful relations. 4. Proportionality. Where all due restraint and precision are properly exercised. 5. Last Resort. Where all reasonable means to avoid conflict seem exhausted and 6. Hope of success. Where there is a reasonable expectation to reverse the reasons for going to war.

Questions indeed abound and answers are few. However, I go back to my "no" in the

classroom and wonder in practical terms in a world complicated by globalization, the

proliferation of rogue states, a radically disproportionate imbalance of military power,^[4] a

growing disparity between wealthy and poor nations, and an inability to access reliable

information free from political interests, can anyone really talk of a "Just War"?

Philosophically by establishing advanced criteria for entertaining armed conflict, does

"Just War" violate its own premise of Last Resort? Does it not send the same mixed

message that a marriage prenuptial agreement does to the wedding vow "for better or for worse?" Ethically, can one really contemplate a "Just War" without dehumanizing the

other as a "them?" And biblically how does this accord with the Gospel mandate to "do

to others as you would have them do to you (Luke 6:31)?

Do we believe our Pentecostal distinctive makes a difference? Can the Spirit of God

enable us to live as agents of change capable of being a peculiar people (1 Pet. 2:9) that actively pursues peace in imaginative ways even in the midst of hostilities without

engaging last Resort measures? How much creativity do we accord God's Spirit? War

always involves two sides. While the question of instigation may be hotly debated, in the end all sides are responsible. I guess when I reach that state of being where I can justly throw the first stone I will enthusiastically support "Just War." Until then with my fistful of questions I am left searching for the alternative way.”

---

And here we are again confronted by yet another war, a so-called pre-emptive war which further stretches the boundaries of any justification. And unfortunately, it is supported by many self-claiming Christians (for example google the New Apostolic Reformation, NAR). According to some, Jesus is pining for a Middle East War so he can return, and I can only guess to throw stones at the ungodly - a biblical interpretation at its most cynical level.

No, I stand behind my earlier claim, there is no such thing as a “just war,” let alone a pre-emptive war. And so I am left with the Jesus prayer, Lord Jesus Christ, son of God have mercy on us as sinners.

---

^[1] This is based on the number of editions that were returned to the editor.

^[2] "The Pentecostal Movement and War", PT, 20 (October 1939):3.

^[3] General Council Combined Minutes 1914-1917 (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing

House, 1917), 11-12.