The Way of Peace - Peace Resources - Sermons and sermon excerpts

Shawn Flory Replogle, pastor
South Waterloo (Iowa) Church of the Brethren
Excerpt from sermon preached Sept. 16, 2001

Scripture: Luke 14:25-33

C. S. Lewis has introduced a very telling phrase: "pain, the megaphone of God." A physical pain is the way in which our body yells out, "Hey, something is not right!" Suffering in the world is God's way of saying, "Hey, pay attention here. Something in the world is not right!" Suffering is warning that the entire human condition is out of whack. Something is wrong with a life of war and violence and human tragedy.

Anyone who wants to believe that the world is here for our own personal party, for enjoyment only, for life to be only comfortable–to eat lots, have a nice home, fulfill every physical desire, live the good life–anyone who believes that must go around with a lot of cotton in their ears because the megaphone of pain is loud and long. Five thousand died in a tower collapse this week; millions have died as a result of the civil war in Sudan; who knows how many hundreds or thousands have died in Palestine and Israel; several hundred thousand have died around this world this year because of starvation. Do I need to go on?

The point is that the megaphone of pain has hit Americans squarely between the eyes this week. We can no longer walk around oblivious to other people's pain because we have felt it dramatically. We can no longer believe that evil doesn't exist here, because it does. God, you now have our attention in a way you haven't had in a long, long time. Now what?...

It is not simply the United States which is broken—it is the whole world, and God knows it. We are now more aware of it than before. Our international friends have known it a lot longer than we, but by the e-mails I have received this week, they have surely known it. Our world has had the megaphone of God rammed squarely up to our ears. We are awake; we are listening; we are poised to respond. . . .

We have been given a unique opportunity to recognize our own mortality, to repent of the ways in which we have actively or passively contributed to the brokenness of the world: through war or violence, through starvation and economic retribution, through visualizing our neighbors and brothers and sisters as less than they are.

As followers of Christ, how will we reflect in the coming days that which Jesus would have done?
How will we reflect our goal of becoming changed persons, seeking the image of God and not perpetuating the cycles of violence?
How will we join with God in the restoration of the Kingdom of God in this world?
How will we show God we have heard the megaphone of suffering this week?

"Is There a Balm To Heal What Ails Our World?"
by Irvin Heishman
Harrisburg (Pa.) First Church of the Brethren
Sermon preached Sept. 23, 2001

Text: Jeremiah 8:14 - 9:1

Summary: Is there a balm to heal what ails our world following terrorist attacks? The media and politicians promote various "balms" under labels such as "A Nation United," "America Strikes Back," or "America's New War." These balms discourage dissent and advocate violent vengeance. Jeremiah questions whether or not there is a balm for what ails us. But he offers us under the label "Grief Beyond Healing," the healing balm of grief, soul-searching, and a God who grieves for us. The use of violence is not a healing balm. But with a God who grieves for us there is hope for healing.

The old Brethren presented their beliefs to one another and to their children with deep humility. They refused to write their beliefs down in the form of creeds because they said, they might be wrong, and others following them might feel obligated to believe them.

I offer the sermon this morning in that spirit. I have tried to understand Jeremiah's message for us in this time. I might be wrong. You will see that my thoughts come from my heart and with passion. But I deeply respect those of you who may disagree with me and I hope to continue gaining better understanding as you help me to hear more accurately the word of the Lord for us in this difficult time.

Let us pray: Oh, God, have mercy upon us. Lord, help us to gain understanding as we consider one anothers' viewpoints and as we seek your will together, in these perilous times. Amen.

There was a very insightful and helpful commentary on National Public Radio this week. The commentator was reviewing the way in which the major news networks have been promoting their version of the news during this national crisis.

There is only one unfolding story essentially. Yet it is packaged and sensationalized in a variety of ways. This is a bit of a simplification but you could say that the news of the terrorist's attacks is a bit like bottled water. How different can one bottle of water be from another? And yet all the different companies which sell bottled water will make all kinds of claims on their labels to convince you that their water is better than anyone else's.

The same is true to some extent regarding the selling of news. So the NPR commentator began to look at the labels the major networks have been putting on their coverage of the national crisis in our country. NBC, for example, has placed the label "America on Alert" on their stories. That label conveys a powerful sense of alarm and fear. It sends a "sit up and take notice" kind of message. It's probably quite effective in getting people to stay tuned into their broadcasts.

ABC has been using the label "A Nation United." This label, of course, is designed to appeal to our sense of patriotism. It sends the message, "we're united, we're strong, we're not going to put up with this" and in this mustered-up-strength we hope that we will feel less vulnerable and more safe. The label "A Nation United" also appeals to that sense of heroism and generosity which has been wonderful and truly healing following this tragedy. ABC was, in fact, recognized for offering the most balanced reporting of the events of the past week. Still, one can't help but wonder if "A Nation United" will allow for voices of dissent, an essential element in a true democracy.

CBS has used far more provocative and sensational labels beginning with "Attack on America." This has a very ominous and dangerous feel which is an effective design to keep you riveted to the TV screen. Later CBS switched to "America Strikes Back." This is strong rhetoric which brings to mind a snake striking out at its prey. This image certainly exploits the anger and rage Americans feel and stirs up the desire for revenge.

But the most provocative label of all has been the CNN coverage which has used the label "America's New War." The NPR commentator pointed out that journalists working for CNN would be under great pressure by this network to make their stories justify this call for war. CNN might profit handsomely from this marketing strategy because it conveys all the appeal and suspense of a great drama. People and more importantly advertisers would certainly be drawn to that and CNN will profit handsomely. But is such biased reporting the best way to help the American people find a healing response to this crisis?

The NPR commentator correctly questioned the ethics of this kind of labeling of news. Journalists should be free in a free society to allow a variety of voices to be heard. Even the toned-down rhetoric of ABC's reporting under the label "A Nation United" might put pressure on journalists to make it look like all Americans are of one mind. Does ABC limit the reporting of voices of dissent in our country in order to make their stories fit their theme "A Nation United"?

I've heard, for example, very little on the news about the strong movement of dissent from many religious leaders across the country and of peace groups who are calling for a more restrained and careful response to this crisis.

There is a statement of religious leaders, for example, circulating by Internet called "Deny Them Their Victory: A Religious Response to Terrorism." It was developed in consultation with Jewish, Muslim, and Christian clergy and then circulated by the National Council of Churches, the Reformed Church of America, The Religious Action Center of Reformed Judaism, and by Evangelicals for Social Action. Well over a thousand signatures so far have been added to the document, including Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist leaders. Christian signers of the document include Protestant, Roman Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox, Historic Black, and Historic Peace traditions. The breadth of the participation has made this document one of the most inclusive religious statements ever released. But I haven't heard anything about it on the news.

I gladly added my name to it. After affirming that every life lost was of unique and sacred value in the eyes of God and that we must dig deep to the roots of our faith for sustenance, solace, and wisdom, the statement calls upon the American government to use sober restraint in how it responds. While desiring that those responsible be brought to justice, the statement says, "But we must not, out of anger and vengeance, indiscriminately retaliate in ways that bring on even more loss of innocent life." We can deny the terrorists their victory, the statement says, by refusing to submit to a world created in their image. We must not allow this terror to drive us away from being the people God has called us to be. We assert the vision of community, tolerance, compassion, justice, and the sacredness of human life, which lies at the heart of all our religious traditions. America must be a safe place for all our citizens in all their diversity. It is especially important that our citizens who share national origins, ethnicity, or religion with whoever attacked us are, themselves, protected among us.

The final paragraph of the statement is powerful. Let me read it to you. "Our American illusion of invulnerability has been shattered. From now on, we will look at the world in a different way, and this attack on our life as a nation will become a test of our national character. Let us make the right choices in this crisis—to pray, act, and unite against the bitter fruits of division, hatred, and violence. Let us rededicate ourselves to global peace, human dignity, and the eradication of injustice that breeds rage and vengeance. A powerful statement.

Unfortunately, I did not hear our president speak a word about eradicating the injustice that breeds rage and vengeance. He wants to try to eradicate terrorists at great cost to our nation and other nations in terms of lives and resources. But he does not seem to recognize the importance of eradicating the injustice that breeds terrorism in the first place.

John Paul Lederach, a gifted Mennonite scholar and expert on conflict resolution, said correctly, I think, that open warfare will create even more of the kinds of conditions in which terrorism feeds and grows. Military action, he said, will be like hitting a fully mature dandelion with a golf club. We might very well succeed in destroying the dandelion but we would in the process scatter seeds of terror all over the place.

Military action, Lederach says, would give further justification for the myth held by many in the world that we are evil. The death and destruction that we would cause through military action would confirm the beliefs of many in the world that we are indeed evil. And thus we would assure that there would be another generation of recruits for terrorist organizations.

There has to be a better way. There has to be a better way.

The Jeremiah Cable News Network, guides us, I think, in the right direction. Jeremiah labeled the crisis facing his city of Jerusalem "A Grief Beyond Healing." It was a horror far worse than what we've experienced in New York and Washington. It's hard to believe that anything could be worse, but Jerusalem was about to be completely conquered, destroyed, and burned to the ground. The whole city would soon be left in ruins. There would be no rebuilding of this city, at least for many, many years. The Jeremiah Cable News Network had advance notice of the disaster about to strike the people. Jeremiah reported in the morning news that "the snorting of war horses had already been heard in Dan." Dan would be the state far to the north, like our state of Maine, and the invading army had already arrived there. The snorting of war horses had already been heard in Dan, Jeremiah reports, "at the sound of the neighing of their stallions, the whole land quakes."

Jeremiah was capable of sensationalism just like our news networks. In his commentary on what was coming he declared, "Gather together, let us go into the fortified cities, and perish there." Only his words were not sensationalized hype—it was the truth regarding how desperate their situation was.

Jeremiah reports, "We looked for peace, but no good came, for a time of healing, but behold, terror."

After reporting the facts, Jeremiah responds in a unique way. He grieves and laments for his people. "My grief is beyond healing, my heart is sick within me." What powerful words from the deepest places within him, indeed these words expressed the very heart of God. You can imagine the Lord God saying, "My grief is beyond healing, my heart is sick within me."

Oh, he cries out in pain, "Oh that my head were waters, and my eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people!" Oh, can we feel the depths of this kind of grief and agony. Perhaps, we have felt it these past two weeks, a sense that our heart has been sick within us. Such profound grief over what has happened to us and to our world. Our hearts our sick and our grief feels beyond healing. Oh, if only our eyes could be a fountain of tears so that we could weep day and night. Our hearts are sick within us.

If Jeremiah were inclined to give labels to the news he had to carry, he may have used the label "grief beyond healing." There is no call for revenge here. He doesn't muster up the troops with hyped-up confidence, saying let's go smoke them out of their holes. He doesn't invoke a John Wayne, wild west violent justice declaring we'll get them dead or alive.
No, he just grieves, "for the wound of the daughter of my people is my heart wounded. I mourn," he says, "and dismay has taken hold on me."

I struggled with this scripture passage because there appears to be no hope in it. Just grief. Even the most famous verse in this scripture about the medicine, the balm in Gilead, offers no hope. With all due respect to the hymn writer, the hymn we will sing soon does not quote this scripture correctly. We will sing, "there is a balm in Gilead to save the sin-sick soul." But the scripture actually says, "Is there no balm in Gilead? Is there no physician there? Why ... has the health of the daughter of my people not been restored?"

Is there nothing that can help? That's the question Jeremiah raises in his news reports. Is there nothing that can help? Gilead was known for its production of a healing salve or medicine called balm. When Joseph was sold into slavery by his brothers, he was purchased by a caravan of traders who had come into the lands of the Hebrews to buy, among other things, balm to take back to Egypt for sale. This balm of Gilead was world famous for its healing powers. But it couldn't help the people this time. Is there no balm in Gilead, Jeremiah laments, to heal my people?

There appeared to be no balm available to heal the wound of Jeremiah's people. Jeremiah is left with grief beyond healing. That's all that this scripture offers. Lament and grief. And what good is that, we might ask. What good is grief?

Well, counselors who work with people who have suffered great loss know that if a person does not grieve they will never be healthy. They will act out the unfinished issues of their loss in unhealthy ways. Grief is essential for health and recovery. So Jeremiah in his cable news network offers grief, deep and profound lamenting, and a heart sickness which overflows in tears for his people. How wise we would be if we would just give ourselves time to grieve, rather than acting out before we have recovered our health. Jeremiah offers us grief.

But as we stay with this passage there is more. There is, along with the grief, soul-searching. This too has been strangely missing from our news networks and in the voices of our politicians. It's so much easier to look out and place blame "out there." And surely Jeremiah must have been tempted to rant and rave over the faults and inhumanity of the enemies of his people. But he does the difficult task, which Jesus once spoke of as taking the log out of our own eyes before attempting to take the speck out of our neighbor's eye. Not that anything justifies acts of unspeakable terror. Nothing justifies that. And yet, Jeremiah recognizes—and this must have been extremely difficult when faced with such unjust cruelty of enemies—yet he recognizes that his own people had angered God by their idolatry. So Jeremiah speaks for God: "Why have they provoked me to anger with their graven images and with their foreign idols."

In America, it seems appropriate to ask soul-searching questions in this time. Such questions might help us get the diagnosis right and therefore result in selecting the right prescription for what ails the world at this time. What have we done as a people to provoke such anger toward us in the world—not just anger of terrorists but of even compassionate and reasonable people? Have our policies toward the Arab world been unfair? Are there ways in which our engagement in the world has been hurtful toward others? What if we were to follow Jeremiah's example and do some soul-searching before we acted?

John Lederach, who raised the legitimate fear that military action would be like hitting a dandelion with a golf club sending forth seeds of new terrorism, believes that there are ways in which we could change that would make terrorism irrelevant by taking away its cause.

One, he would like to see our government energetically pursuing a sustainable peace process to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. "If we would bring," he said, "the same energy to building an international coalition for peace in this conflict that we have pursued in building international coalitions for war," lending balanced support to all sides in the conflict, perhaps peace could be achieved, as has happened recently with the centuries-long Irish conflict. Fight terrorism he says not with force, not in ways that create more martyrs and justification for their hatred of us but by taking away its cause.

Second, he suggests that we expand this effort to other parts of the Arab world. Pursue a quiet diplomatic but dynamic and vital support of the Arab league to begin an internal exploration of how to address the root causes of discontent in numerous regions. Let's do the unexpected he says. What if we took the window of opportunity created by this tragedy to say to the Arab world, How can we help you meed the fundamental needs of your people? Soul-searching could lead to promising nonviolent solutions that build the kind of good relationships that result in true peace and security.

The Jeremiah cable news network looked inward in grief-stricken soul-searching and found that not all was well in their relationship with the Lord and with others. They were not as a people loving the Lord their God with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength and their neighbor as themselves. If we approached the world with that kind of repentant humility rather than with an arrogant show of force, is it possible that world relationships might be dramatically changed and the atmosphere that breeds terrorism might gradually dissipate?

There is in this grief-stricken passage of Jeremiah one final note of hope. It's one we must read between the lines because it's not spoken directly. But you get the sense that it's not only Jeremiah who is grief-stricken. God is the real voice here and through his prophet the Lord has poured out his weeping heart.

If it is ultimately the Lord who has pronounced judgment, and yet at the same time who feels such overwhelming grief, then perhaps there is hope after all. Again, we do not hear that combination of condemnation and remorse on our news networks. We hear only condemnation in the strongest terms for the terrorists and those who harbor them. But perhaps the Lord God grieves for us and for the Afghan people. Perhaps God even in judgment for their violence and our violence grieves for us all. Perhaps God even in judgment knows their suffering through many years of war, knows the hungry cry of their children who have been reduced to near stone age living. Perhaps God grieves for them even while standing in judgment of their violence. And perhaps God even in judgment of our violence, remembering how our government in the cold war days cozied up to these people, and provided them weapons to fuel war with the Soviets, and then dropped them when they lost strategic importance following the Cold War. Still, perhaps God even in judgment of our violence grieves for us in our moment of horrendous loss. Perhaps God grieves for all of us in spite of these sins of violence.

You don't hear much grief on the news networks for our enemies. As CNN enriches itself with its brilliant marketing strategy, you won't hear on CNN any compassion for the people in Afghanistan already fleeing their cities by the thousands, trying to find safety in refugee camps. You won't find any grief on CNN for the numbers of dead to come that could make the horrendous losses in New York City seem small in comparison.

But if we are reading Jeremiah correctly, God is already grieving. And if our God is grief-stricken with love for us even in judgment, then perhaps there is a healing balm in Gilead after all. Perhaps there is a physician after all who can heal our wounds. Perhaps the hymn which we are about to sing is correct after all, even though it goes beyond what Jeremiah could say in his grief. Perhaps there is a balm in Gilead to heal the sin-sick world.

But that balm is not the use of violence. It is the grace of our grief-stricken God who will continue to love us and work for our healing. And it is the healing that can come through our own grief, honest soul-searching, repentance, and genuine concern for justice for all people.

Grief beyond healing is a hard label to sell to the public. I doubt if advertisers will pay much, if at all, to be on Jeremiah's cable news. Jeremiah won't be able to compete with "America Strikes Back" or "America's New War." The people of God in all their diversity—Christian, Muslim, and Jewish—will all have to join together to support Jeremiah's news network without advertising revenue. But thousands are already signing on and, by the grace of God, perhaps there is still hope.

"Overcoming Evil With Good"
by Bob Gross
Excerpts from sermon preached Sept. 16, 2001
at Waynesboro (Pa.) Church of the Brethren

Scripture: Romans 12: 14-21

So, with God's help, I hope I can share a few thoughts about "overcoming evil with good" in the context of all that has happened this week, because, in the midst of it all, there is one thing we know to be true. It may be a very hard thing to accept, but we know it is true.

Nothing that happened on Sept. 11 changes anything about the Christian faith. The will of God, as we know it through the example and teaching of Jesus Christ, is the same today as it was last week. After what has happened, it may be more difficult for us to hear, but the call of God on our lives has not changed.

"Who's Side is God On?"
by Kelly Burk
Richmond (Ind.) Church of the Brethren
Excerpt from sermon preached Sept. 23, 2001

Scripture: Romans 12:9-21

Judging by the fact that Paul uses the word "evil" five times in this section of the letter, it's probably safe to say that the society Paul was living in had its share of problems—not the least of which was the increasing tension between Jews and Gentiles.

Rather than suggest that Christians withdraw from all contact with secular society, Paul invited Christians to live in the world but to carefully search out what is good and hold fast to it. If that society was anything like ours today, there may have been a lot of talk about all of the things that are going wrong in society—the violence, the changes, the crowdedness, the immorality.

But Paul, though he refers to evil, doesn't seem interested in explaining evil—what it is or why it happens. Instead, Paul focuses on how to overcome evil. He offers an entire list of ways for Christians to respond to the evil surrounding them. Never once does he advise challenging evil with evil.

His message was really quite the opposite. All of Paul's suggestions can be summarized in his last sentence of the section. He writes, "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

That is a message, I'm convinced, that our world and our country need to hear now more than ever. In the last few weeks, in light of the terrorist attacks on this country, we've seen the devastating effects of evil firsthand. Thousands dead. Millions grieving. Widespread fear.

But amazingly, we've also seen the power of goodness firsthand. The compassion throughout the country for the people affected in the tragedy has been strong and visible. Those unaffected didn't just go on with their lives and think, "I'm glad that didn't happen to us." Rather, it was as if the entire country just stopped for a few days. And the grieving and fear continue.

Within our country, I've been pleasantly surprised at the extent to which we have responded to evil with good. For the most part, people haven't been taking their emotions out on each other in a negative way. Instead, people have reached out to help one another and lift each other up. People have been generous with their time, money, and prayers. It seems to me to be a wonderful opportunity to witness how responding to evil with good really works.

If only we could extend that approach to our relationships outside this country. When our leaders refer to our country's response to the acts of terrorism, it sounds very much as though the United States plans to overcome evil with evil itself. We plan to inflict upon others the same horror that we experienced almost two weeks ago. It certainly wouldn't be the first time. But I wonder when it will be the last.

When will our country and our world "get it" that fighting evil with evil doesn't work? All it does is perpetuate the evil. Paul presents us with a whole list of ways to overcome evil without using evil ourselves.

He writes, "Let love be genuine; hate what is evil, hold fast to what is good; love one another with mutual affection; outdo one another in showing honor. Do not lag in zeal, be ardent in spirit, serve the Lord. Rejoice in hope, be patient in suffering, persevere in prayer. Contribute to the needs of the saints; extend hospitality to strangers."

I think many in this country have responded within this country in a way that is congruent with the beginning of Paul's list of suggestions for overcoming evil. It's the ones further down on the list that get a little tougher. Such as:

"Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Love in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly; do not claim to be wiser than you are. Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all.

"If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.'

"No, 'if your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink; for by doing this you will heap burning coals on their heads.' Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

When I first read these lines, such as "bless those who persecute you," I wondered if Paul meant that Christians should be passive in the face of evil—that we should just take whatever we get and then be thankful for it. I wondered if he meant we should avoid conflict when he wrote, "If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all."

But as I looked more carefully into this scripture, I realized that Paul was calling not for passivity, but for stances which take incredible courage and integrity. How many people do you know that in the face of evil, bless their persecutors? Or are patient in suffering? How many would you expect to not repay anyone evil for evil? And never avenge themselves? And "if their enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink"?

Not one of these suggestions by Paul for confronting evil is easy. In fact, that's the kind of list that we might look at and say . . . it's too hard to be Christian.

While some might think that being loving toward one's enemies is the cowardly way, I think it's a very difficult way. It's counter-cultural. And yet, it is the way as Christians, as Brethren, we are called to respond—peaceably, but not passively.

Paul wrote that he preferred peace if at all possible, but implied that peace was not to be purchased at the price of conformity to this world. Much of the world would argue that the way toward peace is to combat evil with violence and fighting. But that isn't overcoming evil. It is perpetuating evil.

Overcoming evil with good doesn't mean doing nothing. It's not about standing still and defending ourselves. It's about action, but action that doesn't reflect the same evil we are trying to overcome. The trick to overcoming evil is not allowing that evil to overcome us.

I really appreciate Paul's wisdom in the statement "let love be genuine, hate what is evil, hold fast to what is good." There is a lot of good all around us to hold fast to. People are sharing their compassion, love, generosity, and faith in a way that I haven't seen in my lifetime. So, the problem is not that there isn't a lot of good along with the evil in our world. The problem is that society can't always tell the difference.

Deep in our hearts and whether we like it or not, we know the difference between good and evil. Let's hold fast to that goodness and revel in the ways that God is at work—trusting that God is good and promises to be with us.

I'll close with these words from Jeremiah. "Thus says the Lord: If you turn back, I will take you back, and you shall stand before me. If you utter what is precious, and not what is worthless, you shall serve as my mouth.

"It is they who will turn to you not you who will turn to them. And I will make you to this people, a fortified wall of bronze; they will fight against you, but they shall not prevail over you, for I am with you to save you and deliver you, says the Lord. I will deliver you out of the hand of the wicked, and redeem you from the grasp of the ruthless." Amen.

Larry O'Neill
Skippack Church of the Brethren, Collegeville, Pa.
Excerpt from sermon preached Sept. 16, 2001

I feel vulnerable, and my pride has been hurt. As an American, I don't like seeing the home team hurt. As a veteran, I don't like seeing my brothers and sisters killed. But as a Christian, I struggle with the fact that killing of any sort is wrong.

I have heard the radios and TV's as much as you have. I have heard good Christian people, God-fearing pastors and church leaders, supporting a war. They have quoted the Old Testament's "an eye for an eye." One went so far as to show how David was equipped by God to strike down Goliath. But brothers and sisters, the one question that keeps popping up into my mind, the one I cannot shake as a Christian, as a follower of Jesus, is this: What would Jesus do? We are either followers of his teaching or we are not. There is no gray area.

"Objection Overruled"
By David Radcliff
Sermon preached at Southern Pennsylvania District Conference
Sept. 15, 2001

Scripture: Mark 8:27-35

We can empathize with the disciples to a greater degree today than even last year or this summer or any time up until Tuesday morning, Sept. 11, 2001. We, like them, didn't care to think of ourselves as vulnerable somehow–like them, we had pictured ourselves as in control, as moving along a path whose only gradient was upward, as heading toward a future whose only outcome was brighter and full of every good thing.

And then, the sky began falling. . . .

For the disciples, it came at a moment of great optimism and seeming opportunity. After all, they'd finally gotten it–or at least part of it. It had finally crystallized for Jesus' followers that he was the One–capital "O"–God's messiah sent into the world.

From where we sit, it looks like an easy call: Look at him teach, look at him preach, look at him reach out to people from every walk of life. Anybody can see there's something very special going on here.

But if we were them, these truths may not have been self-evident. For one thing, there were other messiah-wannabes around, and, like the imitation Beatles bands that are kind of the rage just now, they could look and sound a lot like the real thing–and even draw a crowd at $20 a head. So just as it might be hard to tell the Fab Four from the Fake Four, picking the real messiah out of the crowd of pretenders would have been a challenge.

And even if they did begin to suspect that Jesus was the long-awaited One, they might not have wanted to be real vocal about it. The Romans and the religious leaders were on the lookout for anyone with messianic intentions. Such a person posed a potential threat to their respective empires–and empires don't take kindly to those that threaten them. Empires strike back.

So there were good reasons the disciples may not have been quick to see or eager to share that Jesus was messiah–but finally they did both.

That wasn't the end of the problems, however; in fact, it only revealed a larger one. They had gotten the first part right–yes, this was God's messiah–but they didn't quite get part two–what kind of messiah this was. And that was just as important. They needed to get straight exactly who they were following and where that might take them.

It has given me pause when I have heard national political leaders invoke God's blessing and pray in Jesus' name even as plans are being made for an ever-expanding military campaign. I fear that such a campaign may–like so many such campaigns–be indiscriminate in its scope. We're already hearing about the possibility of "collateral damage." That's military lingo for women, children, the elderly, the infirm–for any civilians who may be killed as attacks are made on intended targets. What does it mean to invite Jesus' presence into such a setting? We shouldn't bring the Prince of Peace into the conversation unless we're ready to hear what he has to say.

But lest we be too hard on these political leaders, let's remember that the disciples didn't want this kind of messiah engaged in a conversation with them either. Like everyone else, their kind of messiah was one that would at least promise prominence, security, and maybe a nice tax refund to boot.

So they were taken aback–to say the least–at what Jesus had to say next. That for him, and for them, the road ahead led not to prominence but to service; not to security in the worldly sense, but to risk and even danger; and that the bonus at the end was not to be a fat check but a flat cross.

"Hold on a minute," we can hear them thinking to themselves as Jesus lays out his platform. "There's something wrong with this picture!"

And so Peter, the same one who moments before had made the confession, took Jesus aside to raise an objection–to "rebuke" him, a word that means to sternly correct someone.

"You got it all wrong, Jesus. That's not what being a messiah is all about! That's not what these men gave up their livelihoods for. That's not what the people want. You need to rethink your platform if you want this campaign to go anywhere! We have to stay in control of our own destiny; we have to outfox and overcome our adversaries. We just can't have all this talk about suffering and service and stuff like that. Let's rethink this, Jesus–together."

Not an unreasonable speech, is it? One that's tempting even for us, isn't it? Because if that's what being a messiah is all about, and that's what following a messiah is all about, then it's not gonna be any easier for us to swallow than it was for Peter and the rest. Indeed, it could be harder.

When in history has so much–money, material, military weaponry–been in the hands of so few? Never.

What the average American spends on soft drinks every day–about a dollar–is what a billion of the world's people have to live on every day–about a dollar.

While we spend $30 billion a year on diet products (partly because of things like soft drinks), 30,000 children die every day around the world of preventable causes.

I say this not to minimize the deaths of people on Sept. 11 in New York or Washington or Pennsylvania in any way. Every premature death inflicted by overt deeds or callous neglect is a crime against humanity and an affront to the God who gives us life. It's just that we are not alone in our suffering.

And another point to ponder: Often it appears that Christians in the United States, along with many others, have made a virtue of our seeming military and economic invulnerability–and have perhaps seen this aura of invincibility as evidence of God's blessing resting upon us. This somehow doesn't seem in keeping with the God we meet in Christ Jesus, whose blessing rested on the meek and the servants, not the proud and the mighty.

While it wasn't apparent to them at this point, the disciples would later come to see Jesus' vulnerability as a strength, not a weakness.

And they and we could look back on his life and see him choosing to make himself vulnerable–giving himself to other, allowing them to impinge on his itinerary and to draw him into risky relationships. Redefining the role of messiah, he reached out to the poor along his way, to sinners outside the pale, to women and children discounted as second class, Samaritans, centurions, tax collectors–outcasts all, but those to whom Jesus made himself accessible: sharing himself, giving himself, humbling himself, even–as the Apostle puts it–unto death on a cross.

Has that vulnerability proven to have power?

Has that vulnerability been used to bring good?

Has that vulnerability created a kingdom–not the kingdom of power and pretense and profit for which the disciples may have hoped initially–but a kingdom of justice and righteousness and peace that has outlived even the mighty Roman empire in its duration, and outperformed any earthly kingdom in its effect.

We have all been traumatized by what happened in our country in early September. It makes me sick to my stomach whenever I think about it. But even the grief we feel cannot match the grief God feels as human beings–the crown of God's creation–stoop to such depths of inhuman behavior. That's not really a good analogy, because not even animals treat each other the way we treat each other.

And along with the anger and shock and grief, there is an undeniable feeling of vulnerability–one we have not felt before in exactly this way, as we thought we were secure behind our oceans and affluence and military might. From now on, whenever we stand looking out the window of a tall building, will we not keep one eye on the horizon for danger? I enjoy flying and see flight time as a chance to have a personal retreat and to get work done. But even though I tried hard to get a canceled flight re-booked during the days following the attacks, I was secretly relieved to have to rent a car, even though it meant an overnight drive to a preaching assignment the next morning.

We can respond in many ways to such feelings of vulnerability, and not all of them will be productive and some will be far from Christ-like.

We can stoop to the same manner of stereotyping and terrorizing we have so condemned in others. Mosques and individual Arab Americans were assaulted in the aftermath of September 11. The son of a friend of mine had his car vandalized and had threats made to his face in a crowded elevator on his way to work ("He looks like one of them."). The young man is actually Hispanic, but a beard gave him a Middle Eastern look–and that was all it took. Shaken, he quickly went home and shaved himself clean.

As a nation, we can respond to our tragedy-imposed vulnerability by trying to secure ourselves with bigger weapons and higher fences, or by launching far-reaching military campaigns. Will it make us safe?

We could also take a different tack. We might allow our new-found sense of vulnerability to enable us to feel more poignantly the uncertainties felt by others in our world every day: a child walking to school amid bomb-hurling crowds; or the hundreds of thousands of families throughout Central America this year who see their corn crop–their only food for the winter–wither in the fields from a searing drought; or a woman returning home night by night to an abusive husband–it happens to a million women a year in the United States; or the people of Narus in southern Sudan, who twice in the past year have seen a government bomber circle low overhead, round and round, then climb high in the sky to let its bombs drop–on the health clinic, on the bishop's compound, on Blessed Bakhita School for Girls. Head nurse Clementina Lubaya was already in a bomb shelter–a shallow hole in the ground–and the bombs were whistling down, when she saw a woman standing nearby, a baby in her arms. "Mother, lie down. . . !" It was too late.

Perhaps now we have a better feeling for what they feel–the children, the families, the women, our friends in southern Sudan–and will stand by them more readily and advocate for them more actively and respond to them more out of empathy than sympathy.

And because we now have a visceral feeling that the world is not as safe for us as it was only moments before the attacks, we can seize this moment to commit ourselves to do the things that make for peace. Nobody wants to or should have to live in fear, whether in southern Sudan or southern Manhattan or southern Pennsylvania. And these are things you know how to do, Brethren. You know what it takes to be peacemakers after the manner of Jesus.

Some of you may have heard an interview with the general who commanded the bombing campaign against Iraq a decade ago, as he was interviewed following the attacks in September. When asked what we could do to best contain terrorism, one of the things he said was: "Work for justice." Well, not exactly in those words, but that was the gist of it. He said that as long as so many people were desperately poor in the Middle East, and as long as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was not settled, some people would resort to violence to attempt to bring about change–or just to express their anger and frustration.

Seeking and finding these things would do what increases in the military budget cannot do–bring security based not on weaponry but on opportunity. This same message was powerfully preached by the prophets of old. This same message was exemplified in the life of Jesus as he extended hope and healing and reached out to those marginalized by the powerful ones of his day. This same message is proclaimed in ministries offered by our denomination.

BVSers serving even today in the Balkans, in Central America and Northern Ireland, and in US inner cities. Food relief and development aid from the Global Food Crisis Fund, offering hope to people in communities around the world by giving them the chance to create a decent life for themselves and their families. Brethren mission staff standing by and ministering to Christian brothers and sisters in places the world seems to have forgotten. Brethren congregations reaching out to Muslim neighbors to offer friendship when many others have targeted them for harassment.

So we seek peace by working for justice, by including the outcasts, by expanding the circle of those included in our circle of concern. These things were the marks of Jesus' vulnerability, and indeed were a large part of why he ended up on that flat cross. The people of his time, as the people of our own, did not understand and finally could not tolerate one who drew the circle so broadly as to leave no one out.

And there have been times when this has made you vulnerable too. You've been called traitors for refusing to go to war. You've been slandered for standing by unfairly interned Japanese or unjustly treated African Americans or "commie" Russian Christians. Yet these very deeds brought hope to many and the chance of a brighter future for all.

Brethren member Jane Shepard was part of a Church Women United delegation visiting Russia several years ago. The group of women from various denominations was received by a priest from the Russian Orthodox Church. This was the church with which we maintained relations all through the dark years of the Cold War; a relationship that sometimes drew protesters when the Russian Christians visited Brethren congregations. The priest moved down the line, giving a cordial but perfunctory greeting. Until he came to Jane. "Church of the Brethren!" he exclaimed as his eyes lit up. "I know you!" He went on to extol our relationship with his church over the years, including more recent agricultural assistance. Then he put an arm around Jane and said to the group, "You want to know how to be Christian? These people know how to be Christian!"

Does this kind of vulnerability have power–not worldly power, but spiritual power?

Does this kind of vulnerability–even as it entails a calculated risk–also have rewards that are incalculable?

Does this kind of vulnerability–born not of cowardice but of courage–is it not through this very witness that sanity and respect for humanity may yet be restored to this world which God so loves?

Jesus must have thought so–he bet his life on it. Will we do the same?

"Living in a spacious place"
by Christy J. Waltersdorff
York Center Church of the Brethren, Lombard, Ill.
Sermon preached Oct. 14, 2001

Scriptures: Psalm 66:1-12 Jeremiah 29:1, 4-14

In a time of crisis, who speaks for God?

In the weeks since the terrorist attacks of Sept.11, we have heard many voices claiming to speak for God. The terrorists themselves claim that their holy war against the US is in fact the will of God. Do they speak for God?

Then we have the television evangelists, some of whom do as much damage to Christianity as the terrorists do to Islam. There was Jerry Falwell claiming that God allowed the attacks and the deaths of thousands because of all of the "so-called" liberal groups with which Jerry himself disagrees. I was appalled that he would believe it, let alone actually say it. Does he speak for God?

Then there was Pat Robertson, who initially agreed with Falwell but then distanced himself when the backlash became too loud. Does he speak for God?

So who does speak for God? Our politicians who gathered on the steps of the Capitol to sing "God bless America?" Our president who gave the order to begin bombing Afghanistan?

Does the pastor speak for God? Some think that is part of our job description. But I think my role as your pastor is to walk with you as, together, we interpret the Word of God, and together we experience the presence of Jesus Christ in our midst.

Who speaks for God? God speaks for God. God speaks to each one of us in the privacy of our own lives as well as in the public arena. The problem is that we are often so preoccupied with what we have to say to each other and to God that we can't hear what God has to say to us. And we need to hear a word from God now.

In the Old Testament the people heard the word of God from the prophets. The prophets were in close relationship with God and they told the people what God wanted them to hear. The real prophets were often not popular because the people didn't always like what they had to say. But they said it anyway. The running debate is whether we still have prophets among us today. I think we do, but we have lost our ability to distinguish between the true prophets and the false prophets.

Jeremiah was a true prophet of God and he had the battle scars and the prison time to prove it.

Jeremiah spoke out during the last years of the existence of Judah as an independent political entity. Judah was the southern kingdom while Israel was the northern kingdom. The Babylonian empire became more and more of a threat to Judah, culminating in the siege of Jerusalem, the holy city, in 598-597. At this time the elite, the ruling classes of Judah, were taken into exile in Babylon. Those left behind in Judah ignored the words of the prophet and tried to revolt against the Babylonians. This brought about an invasion in 586 which resulted in the total destruction of the city and the Temple of God.

Although the Jews left in Judah were either killed or fled to other countries, the Jews living in exile flourished. Much of the credit for their survival goes to Jeremiah. It was Jeremiah, as God's spokesperson, who provided the words by which the people would come to terms with the tragedy of their nation, and thus, could rise above it. The prophet was an essential instrument of God in the restoration of the nation.

Many of Jeremiah's contemporaries considered him a traitor and imprisoned him as a subversive. Even the Babylonians thought of him as their ally and offered him asylum after the final destruction of Jerusalem. But Jeremiah was no traitor; his only motivation was to do and speak the will of Yahweh, the one, true God.

In that day, as in ours, there were false prophets. These were people who spoke the words that the people wanted to hear, though not necessarily the words of God. The false prophets were telling the people that their time in exile would be brief and they should fight against their Babylonian captors to gain their freedom. This is, of course, what the people wanted to hear. But it was the wrong message.

Jeremiah, on the other hand, told the people they should settle down in Babylon for the long haul. He told them that they would remain in exile for 75 years—a person's life span. He gave them instructions for the behavior and attitudes that would carry them through this difficult time. Jeremiah tells the people that God wants them to build houses and plant gardens.

Not only that, they are to ensure the future of God's people by getting married and having children and then they are to make sure their children get married and have children. They are to "multiply there, and not decrease" (v.6), so that there will be a people for God to bless in the distant future.

On the one level, this was an appeal to the exiles to return some normalcy to their lives, to get on with the business of living rather than worrying about trying to make something happen that would not happen anyway.

From a theological perspective, this was a call to embrace the reality of the exile, to let go of the past as forever gone, which is what Jeremiah had always told them. The old ways had ended. Everything was different now. As hard as it was for them to accept, Jeremiah's message here is that the exile is the arena in which God would now work.

Jeremiah understood that the future for God's people did not lie with the survivors back in Jerusalem, because they could still trust what they could see—the physical buildings, the city, the temple. They were still placing their hopes in a set of beliefs about how they thought God worked in the world and those beliefs were simply not true.

Jeremiah understood that the future lay with the exiles, because they were the only ones who were ready and open for a future since they really had no present in which to trust. Everything they thought they believed had changed. But even then, before they could embrace a new future, they had to let go of the past and accept the present. They had to abandon the false hopes they placed in military rebellion and in trying to recreate that which was already lost. They had to see their exile as the place in which God would work most effectively.

The promise of God was not a promise of restoration back to the way things were, but it was a promise of a new future that would emerge. And it would be much longer in coming than they had anticipated. Jeremiah told them that the generation who had been taken into captivity would not be going home at all. The hope was for the next generation, for their children and their grandchildren.

For people who want it all now, it is a bitter realization that God's purposes in history, even God's promises, are multi-generational. It seems to be a trait of human nature that we have trouble investing in something that cannot be immediately profitable. We want it all and we want it now! Human beings tend to want to claim the promise from God as their own, rather than embracing the promise of God's work in the world and being a part of that work though it may be for days to come.1

Jeremiah went even further than calling the people to be faithful to God. In one of the most extraordinary and offensive passages of scripture, the prophet calls the exiles to be concerned about the welfare of their captors! He even calls on the captives to pray for the welfare of their Babylonian enemies! The hated enemies are to be lifted up in their prayers to God!

Jeremiah had already been accused on more than one occasion of being in traitorous collaboration with Babylon, so this could be seen as another example of his pro-Babylonian stance. Yet, Jeremiah's advice here is not personal or political, but profoundly theological. The people assumed, given the horror of the invasion, that these events were beyond God's control. And yet Jeremiah's perspective here is that the invasion and exile do not place the people beyond God's care and concern. If God was at work in the world, then the people needed to see that God could work also through the Babylonians. In seeking the welfare of their captors, the captives will have fulfilled their calling as God's people, and will have allowed God to work in the world through them. By doing this they will have embraced the exile as a present reality, as God's present reality, which is the only way they can have a future.

Rather than longing and fretting for the past or for a different present that they cannot create, Jeremiah called them to live as God's people where they find themselves, even if it is a time, a place, and a circumstance not of their own choosing. And as they seek the welfare, the peace, the shalom of Babylon, they will find that they have opened themselves up to their own peace, and to God's future.

The people thought they had God and their relationship with God all figured out. They thought they knew what to expect from God. But when God did something new, they almost missed it because they weren't expecting anything different. They liked things the way they were. The status quo was just fine with them. But God's people must always be open to the living and active word of God. We spend so much time protecting the old orthodoxy that we shut out the newness that God would bring.

When I decided to preach on this text from the lectionary several months ago, I had no way of knowing that it would speak to us in such a different way today. I now believe, with the events of Sept. 11, that we in the United States are in exile. And as people living in exile, we hear the words of the prophet Jeremiah in a new way. To be in exile is to be forcefully removed from one's country or home. I believe, in a sense, that is what happened four weeks ago.

An unimaginable act of violence has forced us from the safety and comfort of the "emotional" country we consider our home. Exile is a time when all of the old certainties are gone, when everything that we thought we were and everything that we dreamed is gone. Sometimes forever.

Those living in exile need two things: they need to come to terms with the reality of where they are; and they need to have hope that there is a future. Exile brings with it anger and pain. It brings with it a sense of helplessness, and sometimes, hopelessness.

It also brings with it an opportunity for God to do something new. And those are the voices we need to be hearing right now.

I do not believe that God caused the terrorist attacks to make us better people. But I do believe that if we are open to God, God can work through this time of pain and sorrow. We are reminded that "nothing that happened on September 11 changes anything about the Christian faith. The will of God, as we know it through the example and teaching of Jesus Christ is the same today as it was last month, last year. After what has happened, it may be more difficult for us to hear, but the call of God in our lives has not changed."2

I would suggest that maybe what has changed is our willingness to seek that call. As Christians, we live fairly comfortably in the culture of the United States. As members of an historic peace church, we really haven't lifted our voices for the cause of peace in recent years, although there have been numerous times we could have. But Dawn Ottoni Wilhelm, preaching professor at Bethany Theological Seminary, reminds us that, "We are not only members of an historic peace church but members of a living peace church; one that seeks to be faithful and responsive to the challenges we face in loving the world as God in Jesus Christ has taught us to love ourselves and each other."

Maybe this time of exile is the time we are to raise our voices and witness to the world in the name of the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ.

Maybe this time of exile is ripe for change and we as followers of Christ have an opportunity to help shape that change.

Peace is not a message our nation seems to want to hear right now. As bombs pound Afghanistan further back into the stone age, the politicians and commentators speak of justice and the power of democracy. While innocent civilians are killed and others are forced out of their homes and into refugee camps, terrorists remain safe in their hide-outs and recruit even more young men to their cause.

Wesley Granberg-Michaelson, general secretary of the Reformed Church in America, believes that our response to terrorism will be a test of who we are. He writes, "In this 'campaign against terrorism,' our strongest weapons are our ideals and values—our belief in the dignity and worth of every human life, our conviction that nations are strong only when they respect the rights of all, and our determination to pursue what is right in ways that are just." This is why, he believes, our struggle is at heart a spiritual one.

He believes that the church must insist on the distinction between justice and revenge. Our task is to resist being overcome by evil, and instead to overcome evil with good.

I doubt there were too many of us who watched those twin towers collapse into a horrifying graveyard, who didn't want, at that moment, to see Osama bin Laden and his henchmen destroyed in a similar manner. But the church must plead with the nation to never forget who we say we are. Our gravest temptation at this hour is to be grasped by the same evil that controlled the terrorists. That is why we must pray fervently, "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil."3

When we try to fight evil with evil, that is precisely when we are overcome by evil. It is not when something evil or violent happens to us, it is when we choose to use evil in response that we are overcome by it. And that is what we must guard against in these days. It is too easy—in the fever pitch of patriotism, and "America right or wrong"—to get sucked into "an eye for an eye" mode of thinking and acting.

Gandhi reminded us that "an eye for an eye" just makes everybody blind.

I call us today to seek a new path, a different path, a path of justice grounded in our faith in Jesus Christ, grounded in our hope in a faithful God. Our hope in God finds reassurance in Psalm 66. In this psalm the community of faith recalls its time of difficulty. The community recalls a time when other people rode over their heads, when they went through fire and water. It was a terrible time. But they were never outside of the care and concern of God. The people do not see this time as a rejection by God or a punishment from God. Their focus is on the release and restoration by God.

The people praise God for keeping them in the land of the living (v. 9a) and for bringing them to a place of well-being (v. 12b). The New Revised Standard Version translates that last sentence as, "yet you have brought us out to a spacious place." Isn't that where we all want to live? In a spacious place of well-being and peace.

I hope that this time of exile is a time for us as Christians and as a nation to reassess our role in the global community in which we live. I hope that we will take seriously the reality that "what we do or do not do reverberates across nations and cultures in ways we do not intend, but must now understand."4

The prophet Jeremiah reminds us that God wants good things for the exiles. God wants good things for all people. Jeremiah tells us, "For surely you know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope" (Jer. 29:11).

In this time of grief, pain, anger, uncertainty and rage, we are called to be faithful to the God we know through Jesus Christ.

My prayer is that one day in the future the people of the earth will proclaim the words from the psalm, "Come and see what God has done!" and they will know that, through our time of exile, we were essential instruments in making God's spacious place a reality.

May it be so. Amen.

1. Bratcher, Dennis, "Commentary on the text," The Christian Resource Institute. <Back to text>
2. Gross, Bob, "Overcoming evil with good," a sermon preached Sept. 16, 2001. <Back to text>
3. Granberg-Michaelson, Wesley, "Lead us not into war." <Back to text>
4. Buchanan, John, "To think and act anew," The Christian Century, Oct. 10, 2001, p. 3. <Back to text>

"The tossed salad I like best"
by Guy Wampler
Lancaster (Pa.) Church of the Brethren
Sept. 16, 2001

During the last five days it has been difficult to live up to a Bible verse that I was reading on Tuesday evening, the day of the terrorist attack. Seventy-five people, according to one count, had gathered here at church trying to cope with the atrocities of that terrible day. I was reading Psalm 46 to them, a Psalm which describes chaos and turmoil something like that which we had experienced that day. The Psalmist wrote about mountains shaking (I thought of the Twin Towers - human-made mountains - shaking), waters roaring and foaming (like the water that flooded the subway in Lower Manhattan when the water main broke), nations raging (I thought about angry Americans.) Then, after reading this description of turbulence, we came to verse ten: "Be still (pause) and know that I am God."

To live the reality of that verse - to be still and know that God will prevail - was difficult last Tuesday evening and it still is. The American people are deeply troubled. Many of us have not slept well at night. We get caught up in television's excesses. Terrorist acts create so much fear, so much outrage. Evil, not God, seems seated on the throne. Our composure and our confidence in God have been put to the test.

Some argue that this is not a time for stillness,... or quietness of spirit. Ecclesiastes 3 says "For everything there is a season" and that paragraph concludes with the verse, "a time for war, and a time for peace." Some people say, "This is not the season to be still. This is a season to be distraught, to be belligerent." Many, many people have said, "This is a time for war, and not a time for peace!"

At that Tuesday evening gathering, when the horror of that day was still vivid and unprocessed and we were groping to express our feelings and thoughts, someone blurted out, "In times past I have thought I may be a Christian pacifist, but right now I don't think I am." Early the next morning at the Wednesday morning prayer breakfast another person expressed almost identical sentiments. Clearly these two people and others also felt ready to lash out, wanted strong retaliation but seemed to feel hampered by being followers of Christ, particularly as members of a peace church. They wanted some response to their dilemma. I ended up asking, "Isn't it too early to answer that question. We don't know who the perpetrators are (at that time we didn't). If we don't know who did it, how can we analyze how to respond?"

Now we know. There were 19 hijackers. They were Islamic men. We know their names. We know places from which they came. We know what weapons they used, remarkably simple weapons. We even know where some of them took flight lessons to become pilots.

Now that we know who did it, what do we do? Clearly something must be done to end this menace to our security. How do we stop this terrorism? What can we do for justice?

One bystander, seen in a television interview which has been replayed over and over again, said, "We must destroy these terrorists, and I don't care much if the ones we kill are innocent or not." Do you realize the irony of those words? We have been saying, "Those Islamic extremists have killed many innocent people. They are ruthless. They have no regard for life." Now, in our anger, we say, "We must destroy them and I don't care much whether the ones we kill are innocent or not." In our anger we become like them. What has happened to us?

Even Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, immediately after the Service of Prayer and remembrance at the National Cathedral on Friday, said to an interviewer, "We must be ready to use weapons of mass destruction!" I wondered what weapons he might be talking about. (pause) I dreaded to think. And who will be our target when we release these terrible weapons? Maybe we could go after those who furnished the hijackers their weapons. But we can't drop bombs on people who sold pocket knives and box cutters. Well, maybe we can find out who financed the flight lessons and blast those people quickly. But we may not be talking about much money. My nephew is a commercial pilot who learned how to fly jets at a training school in Florida. His lessons were not cheap, but he paid for them by delivering pizzas for Pizza Hut.

Several of the hijackers had connections with extremist groups in Hamburg, Germany. Do we fire weapons of massive destruction at Hamburg? Do we bomb Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates, the homelands of some of the hijackers? These Arab nations are our allies. Most of the 19 hijackers have been living in our country, one of them for seven years or more. We can't bomb San Diego or Delray Beach. Franklin Graham did not indicate what places should be our targets.

What about Afghanistan? Two days ago a member of our church sent an e-mail which included this paragraph, "We have to go after those who are behind this. We have to show them that we are not going to stand for them tearing the fabric of our nation. However, we need to take our time and analyze all of the evidence to ensure that we get at the real root of all of this. Nothing could be worse than for us to jump the gun and go into Afghanistan with a bombing campaign that would not only miss our target, but kill countless numbers of innocent people who have been suffering many years due to the ongoing wars and the unrest there since the late 1970's." Something has to be done; what can we do? How can we defend freedom and maintain security without engaging in a reckless destruction of people and places?

I prefer to think of the attacks last Tuesday as criminal acts not as acts of war. Again and again during the last few days people have said, "This is another Pearl Harbor, and the beginning of a war!" I can see similarities between the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the airplane strikes last Tuesday. Thousands of people were killed in both attacks. Both were invasions against our land which seemed unprovoked and were unexpected. America was caught off guard and felt powerless, almost embarrassed. Both times Americans wanted to strike back. In 1941 America got into a war.

But there are significant differences between Dec. 7, 1941, and Sept. 11, 2001. The bombing of Pearl Harbor was the official action of a whole nation. It was planned, coordinated, carried out by the government of a powerful nation, Japan. The attackers last Tuesday were belonged to fringe groups; they were fanatics mostly from nations friendly to America. We need to keep allies in this effort. We need their help to root out the extremists in their countries.

Since the devastation suffered last Tuesday the nations of the world have been wonderfully supportive. The Soviet Union promised to cooperate; they are experts on Afghanistan. China spoke out against terrorism and Japan expressed sympathy. Great Britain reaffirmed its strong alliance with the United States. According to a British estimate one tenth of the workers who died in the World Trade Center were British. Even Arab nations condemned the atrocities, saying this is not the teaching of Islam. Surprisingly Pakistan indicated its willingness to cooperate. Do you see? Most of the nations of the world abhor what happened to Americans last Tuesday. They are ready to stand with us against terrorism. I think of the terrorism last Tuesday as criminal acts of fringe groups, not as the attacks of warring nations.

It may surprise you that a well-known American general seems to agree with this point of view. General Wesley Clark, recently commander of NATO, said on television last Friday evening, "Fundamentally this is a police action, not a military action. We must be selective in the means that we use and in the targets we choose. Diplomatic and political interaction is essential to our success. We can't just kill a bunch of people and have others come back at us."

The general's calm analysis made sense to me. Peace churches can support police action. Police action is directed against the perpetrators, holding them accountable. Its mission is not to kill the offenders, but to stop their criminal activity and bring them to justice. In a war, on the other hand, the enemy is painted with a broad brush and passion against the enemy becomes inflamed with little regard for the innocent, even children, among them.

Do you realize that if we lash out with too much fury, we can divide the world? If we overreact violently we can turn those who are now on our side against us? Suppose our friends - Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others - join the Arab world against us. And suppose the world powers began to take sides - some siding with the Arab nations and others taking sides with Israel and United States - and the world became divided over the Middle East. Talk about insecurity.

Of course we all have deep feelings. Two and a half weeks ago, Linda and I for the first time spent a night, in fact two nights, in New York City. We rode the subway down to Lower Manhattan, got out near the World Trade Center, boarded a ferry to Staten Island, looked back and saw that beautiful skyline featuring the twin towers on a day when the sky was as blue and as clear as it is today. We rode by the Statue of Liberty. Then we came back and found our way to a subway station only a few blocks from the World Trade Center. We didn't know which train to take. A man standing near us said, "You look confused. Where are you going?" We told him. He said, "Stand here with me. The door of your train will open right here." We said, "Thank you. We did not expect a New Yorker to be this friendly. We heard New Yorkers are rude, always in a hurry and unfriendly. But we like New Yorkers; they have been nice to us." The train arrived and we found a place to sit. He followed us and sat beside us. He seemed to want to talk. We talked until he got off at Penn Station. We learned that he worked for J.P. Morgan Chase Bank. He was an executive. Perhaps his office was located at the World Trade Center; if not, it was very close by. We like him. We do hope that his body is not at the bottom of all that rubble.

We think not only about the office workers but also about the passengers on the airplanes. I think especially of the rescue workers, all those fire fighters who were going up the steps when everybody else was coming down.

We think also of people at the Pentagon. Two people in our church are the parents-in-law of someone who works at the Pentagon. He works in the anti-terrorism department in the upper echelons of the Pentagon. He was appointed directly by the Secretary of Defense. Sometimes he lectures at Georgetown University. He once said, "Students always ask me about the where and how of terrorism. They never ask me about the why of terrorism." I told his mother-in-law that I would like to ask him that question (although I think now I understand some of the whys.) She asked, "Do you want to call him? He's very easy to talk with." She gave me a telephone number. I dialed that number the next day. Two rings and someone in the Pentagon picked up the phone. I told his secretary who I was. She said, "He's at a meeting." I said, "It must be very hectic there now." She said, "Unbelievably busy. I'll take your telephone number." I said, "Make this a low priority. He has a lot to do." About an hour later he called back, apparently during our Friday noon prayer service. He left a message with his number, inviting me to call him. I called immediately. A different secretary said, "He's at a meeting." I said, "He's very busy now. I don't want to bother him." I wish that I could have talked with him. I was hoping tell him that some people here at church have been praying for him. I wanted to ask him a little bit about the why of terrorism and I hoped that perhaps I could be a voice for moderation. The son-in-law of two people in our church was working at the Pentagon when the airplane struck, but he happened to be on the other side of the building. That was close and we have a lot of feeling. It's been a very difficult week.

The Bible says, "Be still. . . ." but some people are afraid of serenity now. I think they equate serenity with complacency. I think that they are afraid that if we lose our anger, then our resolve and our patriotism will disappear in a week or two. A Time magazine writer, in a special edition that came out yesterday, was vehement about this point. "What's needed is a unified, unifying Pearl Harbor sort of purple American fury, a ruthless indignation that doesn't leak away in a week or two." These fiery words, written by Lance Morrow, stood out in big, bold, black type in the commentary on the last page. Some people are afraid that if we lose our anger, we will lose the will to stand together against terrorism.

But these words in Time magazine are so different from the words I think Christ would speak. How can I join this kind of fury? Instead I call upon all of you who follow Christ to balance emotion with reason, to treasure human life - all human life, to value relationships, and to be open to the friendship of people of many cultures.

Originally our worship theme for today, "The Tossed Salad I Like Best," featured cross-cultural relationships. I like best the kind of salad in which each ingredient has its own distinctive flavor and texture which enhance the dish without getting lost in the blend. Bill Hayes used that metaphor when he became the first African-American moderator of Annual Conference.

The service of prayer and remembrance at the National Cathedral last Friday was a tossed salad experience at its best. A representative from the Islamic Society of North America read from the Koran. A rabbi from Washington read from the Hebrew scripture. A Catholic archbishop read the Beatitudes. Billy Graham preached, representing the Protestants very well. An African-American preacher ended his prayer with the words, "Respecting people of all faiths, I humbly offer this prayer in the name of Jesus Christ." Thus he prayed, respecting others, yet maintaining his own distinctive witness. That worship service reminded Americans who we are: not a melting pot, but a tossed salad.

Americans have experienced an enormous tragedy and a turbulent week. Quiet, reassuring voices can bring out our courage and strength. Calm, steady voices can appeal to our noblest instincts. May God comfort us now in this place of worship and ease our fears so that when we come to the verse: " Be still and know that I am God," we can not only quote the words with our lips but also recover their truth in our lives. Use your influence to keep anger constructive and intelligent. Pray that our leaders will do the same. Then perhaps this week of fear will be transformed into a week of new faith.

Scripture text: 1 Peter 3:8-18a

In this morning's service, we studied the first phrase of our denominational identity line, "Continuing the work of Jesus..." Tonight we will look at the first of three adverbs that describe how we should continue that work. The word is "Peacefully." "Continuing the work of Jesus... peacefully."

Now I suppose it would be less threatening for all of us if we could discuss this matter when there wasn't a shooting war going on. I am well aware that in this church, as well as mine, Brethren are all over the board on the issue of war and peace and the Christian response.

I assume that tonight I am speaking to some veterans—reluctant warriors who answered the call to military service and fought for this country from a sense of patriotism and a belief that it was their Christian duty to do so.

Others here may have entered the armed forces as noncombatants, serving as medics or other support personnel. You felt it was your duty to assist your country in the war effort, but for conscience' sake were not willing to take an active role in killing.

Some of you may have been conscientious objectors who served you country in alternate forms of service: building roads, fighting forest fires, serving as orderlies in mental hospitals, or taking part in medical experiments. You also loved your country and wanted to do something beneficial for it, but you could not conscience being a part of the war effort or contributing in any way to the killing of another person, even a mortal enemy.

And there may be one or two of you who were non-cooperators—persons who felt that to participate in the selective service system in any way was a violation of your allegiance to the Lord Jesus Christ and his call to peace.

In any sizeable Church of the Brethren, you will find people holding each of these positions and maybe some that I haven't mentioned. That is because our denominational position on the matter does not make Christian pacifism a test of membership. It is what we believe as a church.
It is what we teach as a church. But it is not a test of membership and we will not force this belief on anyone.

Our church arose out of Germany during the "Thirty-Years War," a bloody period when Christians fought against Christians and forced one another to accept certain doctrines. We therefore determined that ever after there would be "no force in religion" among us, even in regard to the principle of nonviolence itself. But with love and conviction we challenge every member to wrestle with the teachings of our Lord Jesus on this matter.

As I understand it, there is no "Brethren Peace Position." To use that phrase makes it sound as though this were some add-on to the gospel, some human doctrine that Alexander Mack and friends came up with. What we believe and promote in the Church of the Brethren is "Christ's Peace Position." What we teach is only what we learned from him. What we practice is only what we saw him do.

In the garden of Gethsemane, at the moment of Jesus' greatest crisis in regard to his own bodily survival and the survival of his infant church, Jesus refused to call down divine commandos. He reprimanded his first lieutenant and told Peter to put away his sword: "...for all who take the sword will perish by the sword" (Matt. 26:52). In the midst of the mayhem and as he was about to be marched away to his own cruel death, he touched Malchus' ear and healed the servant of the high priest, his own mortal enemy (Luke 22:51; John 18:10-11).

Now before we go any further, let's stop a moment and name some of our Brethren presuppositions. Unless we know one another's starting point in an argument or discussion, we have little understanding of one another and usually just end up lobbing verbal bombs back and forth across the front lines of our disagreement.

Presupposition #1: Brethren do not come at the Scriptures in the same way that some other denominations do. We are and always have been a New Testament church. That does not mean that we reject the validity of the Old Testament in regard to helping us come to know God. But we strongly believe that the Old Covenant has been superseded by the New. In Hebrews 8:6 the author writes concerning the Old Testament and its followers:

"But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises."

We are a New Testament church.

Presupposition #2: We believe in progressive revelation and the supremacy of Christ. This is the concept that God has been revealing his will and nature to us little by little over the centuries, as we are able to understand it and receive it. But it is only in Jesus Christ that we have his full and final revelation. Therefore, what Jesus says and what Jesus does is the final, binding authority for the Christian. If and when Jesus' testimony conflicts with Moses' testimony, we as Christians must follow Jesus' way; for he is not just a man, not just a prophet, but the Beloved Son of God.

In regard to the supremacy of Christ, we carry it even further than the distinction between the Old Testament and the New Testament. We believe that even within the New Testament there is a narrower center for our faith and practice. While the history in Acts and the letters of the apostles and the apocalypse of John all inform our faith and encourage us in the Christian life, the four Gospels are and always must remain the center of the New Covenant. And at the very center of the Gospels are the words and teachings and example of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We do not worship the Bible. We worship Jesus Christ, the full and final revelation of God.
Jesus supersedes everything! And so the Brethren have said that we will hold "no creed but Christ."

Now this is a vastly different approach to the Scriptures than those who believe that every single word of the Bible has equal validity and binding authority. And it has great bearing on the outcome of our beliefs in regard to war and peace.

Presupposition #3: A final presupposition that must be clearly stated is that seeking Christ's peace is a far broader pursuit than simply being opposed to war. Peace-seeking and peace-making are to be pursued at every level of our lives and relationships. Inner peace, interpersonal peace, and international peace must simultaneously be the pursuit of the Christian.

Now I grew up and graduated from high school and college in the '70s, the Vietnam War era. And I saw many so-called peace activists at work. Some of them were more abrasive and militant in their approach than any soldier I've ever met. Some of them evidenced personal lives that were a mess—completely out of step with God. They had no inner peace at all. There were about as many ugly peacemakers as there were ugly war-makers in those days. Ironically, demonstrations for peace sometimes turned violent.

Our call for peace will have little credence if it does not come from a gentle and peaceful spirit. If the peace of Christ is not genuinely within us, then who's going to listen to our call for international peace?

If there is spousal abuse or even lack of respect for our mate;

if there is mistreatment of children or continual conflict in our home;

if there is unrest and bitterness within our congregation;

if we are unwilling to forgive our own Christian sister or brother when they have hurt us in some way;

we have no spiritual authority by which to call the world to Christ's peace.

If you've spent your life lobbying for world peace but your family is a conflicted mess, bring it home, Brother!
Make it real, Sister!
Pick up that telephone; drive over to your brother's house!
You know the one—the one you haven't been speaking to for the last five (or is it ten or even fifteen?) years now.
Continuing the work of Jesus peacefully means at every level of our lives.

Some of you here tonight have hearts that are not at peace with yourself. Even if at some point in the past you gave your heart to Jesus, somewhere along the way you took it back again, and you are no longer yielded to him, no longer allowing him to be Lord of your life. And now trouble piles upon trouble and conflict is heaped upon your heart. You ache for peace; you cry out for peace; but you've forgotten where to find it.

O, sister! O brother! You find it in Jesus! For he himself is our peace (Eph. 2:14).

Confess your sin.
Ask for his forgiveness.
Invite him back or invite him in for the very first time.
Ask the Prince of Peace to be the Lord of your life and know the sweet, sweet peace of salvation!

Then, from a peaceful heart, move into the world.
Restore beautiful relationships with your children, with your husband, with your wife.
Recover those damaged friendships.
Rebuild the unity of your church.
And from there, move out in ever-widening circles of peace, touching even your enemies with the forgiveness and the love of our Lord Jesus Christ.

"Finally, all of you, have unity of spirit, sympathy, love for one another, a tender heart, and a humble mind. Do not repay evil for evil or abuse for abuse; but, on the contrary, repay with a blessing. ...seek peace and pursue it. For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayer" (1 Peter 3:8-9a; 11b-12a).

I and every member of the Church of the Brethren stand horrified and grief-stricken at the violence that has torn our land. We mourn with the families of those thousands of innocent people who died on Sept. 11. But the Church of the Brethren stands opposed to the current war, as we have stood opposed to all wars in the past.

Yes, let us use every nonviolent means at our disposal to track down and shut down networks of terrorism. Let us freeze their assets and identify and expose those businesses that front for them.
Where possible, let us incarcerate those who continue to believe that violence against civilians is a legitimate means to gain attention for their cause.

But let us not as a nation continue the myth of redemptive violence. The terrorists believed the myth that destroying the World Trade Center would somehow better their world and forward the cause of Islam. It has done neither. But God forbid that we should make the same mistake, that we should trust in redemptive violence. The bombs falling upon Afghanistan and the Green Berets and Army Rangers that we are inserting will not stamp out terrorism. They will instead insure that the cycle of hatred and revenge will continue well into the new millennium.

Already our bombs have convinced a new generation of Afghani children and youth that the myth is true: that Americans are a violent, uncaring people who rain their bombs upon hospitals and relief centers and humble homes, and that we blow up entire villages because our intelligence tells us that a few combatants reside there. Already they believe the myth that our war is with their religion and their ethnicity, and that we desire to destroy them both.

None of this is true but, day by day, as the bombs fall with greater intensity and civilian casualties mount, we reinforce the myth and insure that our children and theirs, our grandchildren and theirs, will remain enemies. And more and more young, prospective terrorists will believe that Sept. 11 was justified in the eyes of Almighty God.

Let the people of Christ stand up and say, "Enough!"
Let the people of Christ continue the work of Jesus... peacefully.
AMEN.

(Author's note: This sermon was informed by the entire November 2001 issue of MESSENGER. It is also built upon the arguments marshaled by John Paul Lederach in his article "The Challenge of Terror: A Traveling Essay.")

Copyright © 2001 by Daniel M. Petry. Petry is pastor of the Middlebury (Ind.) Church of the Brethren. This sermon is part of a series on the Church of the Brethren tagline, "Continuing the work of Jesus. Peacefully. Simply. Together," preached at the New Paris (Ind.) Church of the Brethren.

"Holy war, just war, and peace"
by John Jackson
Happy Corner Church of the Brethren, Dayton, Ohio
Veterans Day, Nov. 11, 2001

Since September 11, I have heard three major responses to our war on terrorism. The differences revolve around the use of force. First, there are those who fully support our use of force and wish we would use more of it to avenge those killed. Second, there are those who have reluctantly concluded that force is necessary to bring about justice in this situation—that going to war is the lesser of two evils. Third are those who believe that any use of violence is unjustified and that we should seek justice through nonviolent means.

In the Church of the Brethren, I believe we have the same range of opinions on this topic. The goal of this study is to explore the biblical themes that justify each of these three positions and to help you examine your own position, to realize the strength and weaknesses of your stand, and be willing to engage in dialog with those with different views. The governing body of the Church of the Brethren has affirmed our need for dialog. Annual Conference states that the church "feels constrained by Christ's teachings to recommend refusal in good conscience to submit to military conscription. . . . It is recognized, however, that not all members hold the beliefs which the church recommends. Some will feel conscientiously obligated to render full military service and other noncombatant military service. . . . Since the church desires to maintain fellowship with all who sincerely follow the guidance of conscience, it will respect such sincere decisions. It will also extend its prayer, spiritual nurture, and material aid to all who struggle and suffer for a fuller understanding of God's will (The Brethren Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, p. 832).

I am also aware of other factors that enter into this discussion, like the fact that Happy Corner Church of the Brethren is a historic peace church and that many of our members are veterans.

Now let us look at each of the three categories. I have labeled them this way: Holy War, Just War, and Pacifism/Nonviolent Resistance as a way for us to sincerely struggle for a fuller understanding of God's will.

Holy War
Driving south of Cleveland late at night, I found a country music station that was broadcasting a disaster fund-raising concert from Nashville. I heard Hank Williams, Jr., sing a song of war that got the crowd roaring. It was entitled "America Will Survive." It was a song of hope, violence, revenge, and patriotism. It seemed to really strike a chord with the crowd. Now it may surprise you that the Bible has similar "songs"! If you listen to that song and then read many parts of the Bible, you will find remarkable similarity, even in the Psalms!

Here are some examples: Psalm 37:28b: "Evil-doers will perish eternally, the descendant of the wicked be annihilated." Psalm 68:23: "So that you may bathe your feet in blood, and the tongues of your dogs feast on your enemies." Psalm 137:9: "...a blessing on anyone who seizes your babies and shatter them against a rock!" Does it surprise you to find such statements in the Bible? Read through the biblical books of Joshua, Judges, and Revelation and you will find further actions and thoughts along these lines.

What are we as Christians supposed to do with such statements and narratives? People acting on these scriptures have perpetuated many atrocities, genocide, and holocausts. Some say that a Holy War ethic drove the religious fanatics that perpetrated the attacks on the World Trade Center.

While a Holy War ethic can never be the way a civilized society conducts itself, it can be a way for grieving individuals to express their anger. One redeeming factor from the statements of violence from the Psalms is that the psalmist is calling on God to act. As Christians, I think we can learn something from this. Far too often, we believe that getting angry, or having feelings of anger is sinful. I would submit that feelings of anger and revenge are quite natural and that they need not lend themselves to sin as long as we pray them to God. Once we have turned these feelings and actions over to God, we are then ready for the next stage of the grieving process.

Just War
One of the most jarring movies I have seen is called "Saving Private Ryan." The movie starts with some of the most violent images of war, and by the time this opening sequence is over you wonder why anyone would ever want to participate in war. As the story progresses it focuses on a reluctant soldier who cannot bring himself to shoot the enemy, until the end. The reluctant soldier finally does kill the enemy when he finds himself confronting an absolute evil. Those who believe in the just war theory do not see war as glamorous or Christian, but as the lesser of two evils. For instance, going to war to stop terrorists who have attacked us is just.

There are again scriptures in the New Testament that support or at least do not contradict this view. When soldiers come to John the Baptist in Luke 3:14 asking what they must do to repent in order to prepare for the coming judgment, John recommends that they do not steal money or lie. However, he does not tell the soldier to stop soldiering. When Jesus cleanses the temple in John 2:13-25, he makes use of a whip (perhaps used just on the animals) and overturns tables. In Acts 10, Peter converts Cornelius, a Roman centurion, and Cornelius does not have to leave the Roman army. Perhaps the strongest passage in favor of the just war position is found in Romans 12:1-7, where Christians are exhorted to obey those in authority, for the authorities are a "servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer."

What are Christians suppose to do with such statements? The just war theory is a compelling argument and its greatest effect on us came at the start of World War II. Up until that time most Brethren males were conscious objectors (they would not serve in war), but after Pearl Harbor only 10 percent of Brethren males claimed CO status and the rest served in the military. The latest attacks on the World Trade Center have had similar effects. Today some pacifists (including pastors) have foregone their previous convictions in light of the terrorists' attacks.

Remember, though, that the just war theory looks better on paper than in reality. Violence is not a neutral force; it is an addictive force. While the United States entered World War II because of the atrocities committed at Pearl Harbor, so did the USA and its allies commit atrocities in the conduct of the war. For example, toward the end of the war the allied forces wished to break the will of the German people by fire-bombing major cities such as Dresden. The result of this action was the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent civilians and a strengthening of the resolve of the German people. This action was in no way just. It seems we have not learned from history: Our current bombing of Afghanistan seems to have resulted in some civilian deaths and the strengthening of the resolve of our enemies.

Pacifism/Non-violent Resistance
There seem to be many different views on what pacifism is. Some are strict pacifists who live very separate from the world and from any form of violence. The Amish are the clearest example of this kind of pacifism. They do not vote, pay taxes, or use public institutions, and they only ask to be left alone. If harmed they will not call on the police to seek justice, for that would mean they were participating in violence. A strict pacifist would not have resisted the terrorists on flight 93 that crashed near Somerset, Pa.. A supporting scripture of this view can be found in Matthew 26:52, where Peter has just used a sword to defend Jesus. Jesus rebukes Peter and says, "Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword."

The other major view of pacifism is nonviolent resistance. This view is most clearly expressed in Jesus teachings on the Sermon on the Mount found in Matthew 5-7 and in Romans 12:9-21. In the Matthew scriptures Jesus calls peacemakers "Children of God" and instructs his followers to pray, forgive, and love your enemies. Jesus calls for a higher righteousness than a tooth for a tooth. What this means for the Christian is that we should overcome evil with good, as Paul states in Romans 12.

The way of pacifism calls us to believe that the means will justify the end. We are to be faithful and let God take care of the outcome. However, it is understandable that in the face of absolute evil many of us are uncertain how we would respond. My prayer is that all of us would not be so concerned with our own religious purity on this, but that we be more open to learning from each other. If Christians cannot at least demonstrate their love for God and neighbor through constructive dialog, then what good are we?

The reality of being a historic peace church in pluralistic democracy has always challenged us as Brethren. The way of peace is never easy, but I believe that it is only as we honestly and lovingly dialog with each other that we can achieve peace inside of our fellowship.

"The Source of Peace"
Kate Gandy
Richmond (Ind.) Church of the Brethren
Jan. 27, 2002

Scriptures: John 14:27, Romans 12:9-21

Terrorist Attacks. Military intervention. War on Terrorism. Skirmish. Economic Sanctions. Friendly Fire. Nine Eleven. These words and phrases are heard everywhere now. The climate of the world has returned to some semblance of "normal" yet we are still in a different world, a different understanding; we are living in the midst of a different focus. Because of my limited scope of reference—having been born at the end of the Vietnam War—this atmosphere is the closest comparison I have to the world in which the founders of the Church of the Brethren lived. Some of you will undoubtedly have stronger comparisons to make—and I invite you to think about them now—which will help us all to understand the world surrounding the first eight Brethren.

They had just lived through thirty years of war. Not war fought far away and only brought close by satellite television, newspapers, radio and the World Wide Web. They lived through war in their counties, their downtowns, their backyards, and in their religion. For a few years, all the churches would be Catholic because the area was being ruled by a Catholic prince. Then, suddenly, there would be a new Reformed prince, and overnight the church would have a Reformed priest. As they gathered and studied the New Testament, early Brethren saw clearly that Jesus Christ pointed toward a God of Peace and that his message was one of reconciliation.

For two hundred years Brethren, determined to follow the Prince of Peace rather than any human princes or governments, lived out their faith in communities located in, but separated from, the secular world. They called this facet of their faith "defenselessness," defined by James Lehman in his book The Old Brethren as the opposition of violence of any kind and this was made a test of faith [Elgin, Ill: Brethren Press, 1976, p. 54]. This baptismal vow was certainly tested during times of war, when Brethren men were drafted. This is not to say that Brethren only thought of peace as related to war. The story of George Miller, who was the victim of a thief trying to steal his ox, reminds us that Brethren not only refused to retaliate when wrong was done to them, they did good instead. Brother Miller walked twenty miles to take warm blankets to that thief when he heard that the man was held in a cold, drafty jail cell.

The twentieth century marked many changes for Brethren. As Brethren have become acculturated, some of the distinctive practices and or beliefs have been modified and even discarded. Some have also grown in their interpretation. I think that the peace witness is one Brethren distinctive that has seen much growth, although that is not to say that it hasn't seen its fair share of alteration.

Following in the footsteps of the original eight, we have based our peace witness on New Testament revelation of the new covenant in Christ. We have taken seriously the words of Matthew that tell us to turn the other cheek and to love our enemies, as well as the Gospel passages that remind us that Jesus gives us the gift of peace. We are filled with the hope of prophets who share God's promise of a world where lambs and wolves lie together and where swords are made into plowshares. We struggle with the Old Testament images of a God who commands military troops, floods the world, and turns people to salt. We struggle with the idea of spiritual warfare in our world today. We still do not have perfect understanding.

Our imperfect understanding still has, however, allowed us to be open to the Spirit's leading. As I've looked back over Annual Conference statements related to the peace witness, I've noticed that there was a monumental shift in 1991. Prior to the statement adopted by the Annual Conference body that year, all Annual Conference statements had only defined peacemaking as it relates to war. The 1991 statement, titled "Peacemaking: The Calling of God's People in History," is much wider, and names applications to our entire lives and reminds us that peace comes from God. It reminds us that shalom and eirene—the words in the Bible that we translate as "peace"—have meanings and understandings that are lost in our simple word. Shalom, the Hebrew word, has connotations of health, wholeness, good relations, safety, and prosperity. Eirene, the Greek word, gives a sense of the absence of war and discord, a sense of harmony and, by its association to shalom, has taken on a sense of its meanings as well.

When Jesus reassured the disciples after the last supper, he promised them this peace, this shalom. As John tells it, after the supper and after Judas had left the group, Jesus shared his last teaching with his disciples. As he began to speak to them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, his love for them, and his desire for them to remain faithful to him after he is no longer in their midst, he tells them, "What I am leaving with you is shalom—I am giving you my shalom. I don't give the way the world gives" [Jewish New Testament]. The peace—the shalom—Jesus left with us is much more than the absence of anything because it is the presence of more than we can imagine. It is the gift of right relationship with God; the wholeness of being a creation of God, fully in tune with God's desires. And it is out of this relationship that we extend God's peace in our world.

I said earlier that the Brethren peace witness has expanded in its interpretation. Each of us, I think, will have a slightly different take on this interpretation, but the important thing is that there is room for all of them! We are each called to different ways of living peacefully in our world. We need to remember to extend grace to each other in the midst of our diversity.

Gene Roop shares his frustration with the all-or-nothing understanding of peace witness on the On Earth Peace Assembly Seeking Peace web page when he writes, "There has been a sense that there is no peace witness if we don't all agree what it is. But between generations, there are many different ways to bear witness to the fact that God's direction in the world is toward shalom and that violence is not the way."

Gene continued, "I think of my grandfather, which whom I did not agree about peace witness. He was a classical Anabaptist, held the strict sense of two kingdoms theology [which refers to the struggle of being a member of the heavenly kingdom yet living in the earthly kingdom]. He couldn't understand his grandson, formed in the 1960s, who wanted to write letters, try to influence the political process, etc.

"I think also of Andrew Cordier, who tried to be a part of bringing justice and peace to the world through his work with the United Nations—he was part of the executive department in charge of peacemaking. Many members of the church disowned him entirely! He thought he was living out his heritage and others thought he was betraying it."

Gene concluded with very powerful questions: "Is my grandfather irrelevant and is Andrew Cordier a betrayal? Or are both a part of the living tradition? (And I'm not at the same place as either one!)"

Somewhere I heard the saying, "For peace people, you sure are scrappers!" I don't know if this was said of Brethren, Mennonites, or Quakers, but I don't think it matters. We all need to remember Paul's words to the Romans, instructing believers to love each other, to respect each other, to pray regularly, to bless our persecutors, to be sensitive to each other, to live in peace, to never seek revenge, and to repay evil with good. The world needs to hear the message we have to share and we can't share it when we are at odds with each other about how to share it.

We need to recognize the fact that we live out our understanding of God's peace in many different ways. This has come to a head in many Brethren congregations over the last few months as we once again are confronted by the difference between the world's peace and God's peace.

I believe very strongly that military service is wrong. I choose not to participate in the strong nationalistic spirit that has enveloped our nation. But I also realize that God has spoken to me and loosened my ability to be accepting of those who differ from me on these points. During the Gulf War, I was extremely judgmental about those who were participating in the military. A friend who was recently baptized into the Church of the Brethren became engaged to a young man, named Kevin, whose life-long ambition was to be a military police officer. I can't remember some of the things I said to them, but I know that some of what I said was very hurtful and self-righteous. I couldn't recognize it as such at the time. Because Kevin was in the military I classified him as being less than human and that was wrong.

We don't always recognize the times that we manage to obscure our good news of salvation and peace in Christ. Last September, as we worshiped in the park, we grieved for the lives lost the previous Tuesday and prayed that our country would not succumb to an "eye-for-an-eye" mentality. My concern for us is that we were one-sided. One of our visitors that day was a woman who was living in fear that her husband, who serves in the military reserves, would be called up for duty. Our assumptions of unity on the subject of peacemaking, while well intentioned, may have meant nothing to her. I do not remember that we prayed for those who may be called to fight in the event that our government did decide to retaliate. I hope we did.

I don't pretend to have all the answers to the dilemmas created by the diversity of Brethren peace witness in the twenty-first century, but what I do know is that any of the letter writing, service work, demonstrations, refusals to participate in military service—any of the actions we take to show that we believe we are living in the intersection between our broken world and the heavenly kingdom—are meaningless if they are not grounded in relationship with God. One of the things Jesus told the disciples after he promised them his shalom, was that they are the branches and he is the vine and apart from him they could do nothing. So it is with us. We can bear fruit only if we are living in God's shalom. May we turn and return to that source so that we are refreshed and re-energized to continue our efforts to share God's message of peace with the world. Amen.


By the tender mercy of our God, the dawn from on high will break upon us, to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. Luke 1: 78-79

If there is spousal abuse or even lack of respect for our mate;
	if there is mistreatment of children or continual conflict in our home;
		if there is unrest and bitterness within our congregation;
			if we are unwilling to forgive our own Christian sister or brother when they have hurt us in some way;
		we have no spiritual authority by which to call the world to Christ's peace.