February 2nd, 2003
Rev. Andrea Harrison
Responsive Reading: Psalm 111
Gospel Reading: Mark 1:21-28
"You and I serve our country in a time of great consequence. … We have the duty to reform domestic programs vital to our country; we have the opportunity to save millions of lives abroad from a terrible disease. We will work for a prosperity that is broadly shared, and we will answer every danger and every enemy that threatens … . In all these days of promise and days of reckoning, we can be confident. In a whirlwind of change and hope and peril, our faith is sure, our resolve is firm, and our union is strong."
These are opening remarks from President Bush’s State of the Union Address on Tuesday night. It was a compelling speech, if one can get past the strains of American patriotism, and the interruptions of applause. I caught the beginning of the speech on TV - checked out the President’s blue tie, observed the standing applause - then opted to listen to the speech on CBC radio.
By the end of the speech, I found myself leaning toward the call to war against Iraq. I found myself becoming convinced of the sense of urgency to deal militarily with the threat that Saddam Hussein presents to the world.
President Bush made the point that,
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."
Twelve years ago, I was clearly opposed to the Gulf War. This time around, I have been more ambivalent. What if Saddam Hussein is within three months of developing a nuclear bomb? (and note that it is "nu–cle-ar" not "nu-cu-lar" as Bush insists on saying) What if Saddam’s regime does launch a pre-emptive strike on Israel, or smuggle biological or chemical agents of mass destruction into the U.S., or sell such weapons to other terrorists? Is this more of a threat than the thousands of nuclear missiles sitting, guarded by chain links fences and under-paid security guards, all across the former Soviet Union.
Project Ploughshares cites sources that estimate that,
"At the low-end, a "quick victory" war of a few months is estimated to cost US$50 billion in direct costs, whereas a year-long war would be three times that. Overall costs over the next decade, including reconstruction and economic downturn triggered by war, would likely range from a modest $120 billion (if everything goes extremely well) to a more substantial $1.6 trillion in a much worse case scenario (if the war drags on, occupation is lengthy, nation-building is costly, the war destroys a large part of Iraq’s oil infrastructure, and there are both lingering military and political resistance to US occupation, and major adverse psychological reactions to the conflict.]"
Lloyd Axworthy, Canada’s former Minister of Foreign Affairs, expressed his views from Amman, Jordan, in a radio interview on As-It-Happens on Tuesday night, prior to George Bush’s State of the Union Address. Axworthy said,
"I think there's a good chance that a military intervention would … engender a lot more hostility. There would be a lot more sense of... being excluded, of being set aside ... If we only … did something about the extreme water shortages, did something about the development, showed people there's a dividend, then you might... get people believing again that [they] can trust …what the international community is up to. But they don't see signs of that.
We haven't really tested out all the resorts. Military forces should be a last resort, not a first resort. And I'm afraid this is where the... US philosophy under George Bush always looks to a military action as its first instinct, not as its last instinct.
What are we to believe? In December, I tried to avoid the whole issue. This month, however, I find myself trying to listen to as much information as possible – news reports, interviews, even radio talk shows. I want to have an informed opinion so that I can take a stand for what is right. I want to consider varying viewpoints. The truth is out there, but then, truth is the first casualty of war.
The line of Scripture that jumped out at me in this week’s readings is the reaction of the people in the temple in Capernaum to Jesus. "They were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes."
That’s what I want to hear – the voice of one having authority, not as the politicians; that voice of truth, that reflects the wishes and wisdom of our God, rather than the agendas and follies of we humans. Where is that voice? Speak to us God!
When it comes to decisions about waging war, it’s obvious that we might like to know what decisions God would make. But there are all kinds of smaller decisions that we make, where we would like some wisdom from God; where we would like clear information to help to know what is right, and to know what to do.
Graduating high school students are trying to figure out what to do with their lives beyond grade 12 or 13. To stay home & do some more courses. To take a year off and work or travel. To go to this college or that university. To apply to this programme or that. And there are so many opinions – those of parents, peers, teachers …. There are the recommendations that universities, colleges, and programmes make for themselves in terms of what they have to offer. How does one decide?
Another bewildering scenario is that of life threatening illness. Often in finding a diagnosis, one needs second opinions and more tests. And then there are choices to be made about treatment, choices with probabilities of outcomes. Nothing is certain. Where is the voice that will speak with certainty?
Psalm 111, which we read responsively today, concludes by saying, "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all those who practice it." If we fear God, as in, if we are first concerned about the wishes and wisdom of God, we are less likely to be terrorized by the prospects ahead of us, and less likely to make choices out of fear.
In his State of the Union Address, President Bush asked the Congress to commit $15 billion over the next five years, including nearly $10 billion in new money, to turn the tide against AIDS in the most afflicted nations of Africa and the Caribbean. This is a good decision! This was good news in the ear of Canadian Statesman and United Nations Special Envoy, Stephen Lewis, who is working day and night to determine the impact of HIV/AIDS on Africans, and to mobilize the international community to respond.
Listen to the words President Bush used as a lead up to this promise. He said, "As our nation moves troops and builds alliances to make our world safer, we must also remember our calling as a blessed country is to make this world better." Making the world safer; making the world better. I would suggest that our efforts to make the world safer, have fear as a driving force. When we are afraid, we sometimes make rash decisions. We are willing to commit financial and human resources. We may make decisions that are not consistent with the ways we generally live our lives. We may not think about the long-term consequences of our decisions.
Marketers know this, and use it to make sales. How often are products available at a low, low price, for a limited time only, until inventory runs out. ‘Buy now’, because if you don’t, you’ll never get a deal like this again. Inducing a little fear is a great way to influence decision making.
Our scriptures tell us to fear God, or we might say revere God, and not to live in fear of the circumstances of our lives, or make decisions driven by anxiety.
Think about the angel Gabriel, when he approaches Mary. What is the first thing he says to her – "Fear not". The decision she is about to make should not be based on fear and trepidation due to the presence of an apparition. It is to be made with a clear mind. It is to be made from the heart, not from that pit of anxiety in the stomach.
What does Jesus say to his disciples before he dies, and again when he meets with them after his resurrection? – "Don’t be afraid", "Peace be with you." If the disciples were going to have any chance at fulfilling their calling as people of faith, they were going to have to overcome their fears, and allow the Spirit of God to move among them.
The husband of someone I know through the world outreach network was terminally ill. I can only imagine that he shared the same passion for the well being of the world, that shows so through so clearly in the life and work of his wife. She tells me that at one of the points where he had to make a decision about treatment, he chose not to take any further treatment to prolong his life. His reason for this was that he had had a good life, and did not wish to consume any more of the valuable hospital resources or tax dollars that he thought could be better allocated elsewhere.
I imagine that this kind of thinking was absolutely consistent with how he had lived his life, in life. To make this kind of decision, he must have been facing death unafraid – unafraid of letting go of the security of this life for the unknown of the next. He must have been able to overcome whatever fears he may have had of death, and was thereby free to make decisions with clear head and an open heart.
Alternatively, a person might find the prospects of facing the side effects of treatment scarier than facing death. But such a person might discern that it would be a great gift to his or her family to have a little extra time. Consistent with the way that person had lived his or her life, that person might summon the courage to face treatment and choose that little extra time with family.
When we think about what it means to be a Christian, we often think in terms of being loving. Today, I would say that we should think about this in terms of being unafraid. To make decisions, not based on what is "safer", but on what is "better". To make decisions, not from the pit of anxiety in our gut, but from the confidence and compassion of our heart, and from the clarity of thinking of our minds.
Are times when waging war is the better option? I would say yes. Ilan Ramon, the Israeli fighter pilot who died in the explosion of the space shuttle, Columbia, yesterday, was one of the fighter pilots who flew in formation over Saudi Arabia to Iraq in 1981. The group of fighter planes flew wing tip to wing tip – so close to each other that they were able to appear, on radar, as a passenger aircraft. They bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor, that was under construction. The world, including the U.S., condemned this action. Hindsight shows that they set back Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons programme by 10 years. In 1991, it was the U.S. who bombed such targets, and, as far as we know, Iraq has not yet achieved nuclear capability.
What should be done today? Well, that depends on a lot of things. On Wednesday of this week, American Secretary of State Colin Powell will "present information and intelligence about Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups." Will this information have clarity that enables an appropriate evaluation of risks and long-term consequences? Will it’s purpose be to instil fear to gain support for a course of action which misses the mark in terms of global security?
What can we do? At the very least, we can all pray daily that world leaders will exercise wisdom, and that decisions will be made on the basis of what is "better" for the world, rather than what might make us feel "safer" in the present.
"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all those who practice it."
