| Orthodoxy and the Religious Right |
| Written by Glen Chancy | |
| Tuesday, 18 November 2008 | |
|
At least, according to the latest theory in vogue among Christian Dispensationalists. According to author Bill Salus: For those unfamiliar with the Old Testament prophet, he foretells in Chapters 38 and 39 the coming of a Russian - Iranian-led, nuclear-equipped coalition that invades Israel in the last days. For a litany of recent newsworthy reasons, all indicators point to this enormous episode occurring in the very near future. This short snippet from Mr. Salus presents several religious beliefs which are common among members of what is termed, in the United States, the Religious Right. To summarize the ones presented here:
These beliefs are all part and parcel of a Theological system called Dispensationalism. (A good introduction from the Orthodox point of view can be found here.) The vast majority of Americans are not, strictly speaking, Dispensationalists. Not all Evangelical conservatives are either. In fact, I'm a big fan of an Evangelical pastor named Chuck Baldwin, who ran for president in 2008. However, the influence of Dispensationalism on both US foreign and domestic policy is immense. Dispensationalist literature sells widely in both Christian and general bookstores. The Left Behind series of books had worldwide total sales of 65 million dollars. The most widely recognized and influential Christian preachers are Dispensationalists such as John Hagee and Pat Robertson. Dispensationalists form the core of the Religious Right, and in this capacity have a profound influence on the Republican Party. Many prominent politicians, such as Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin, are also Dispensationalists. Pound for pound, Christian Dispensationalists pack more punch than any other faith group in the American political system. Which is why even Roman Catholic and Episcopalian politicians, when running as Republicans, often sound downright revivalist, particularly when talking about the Middle East and Russia. All of this makes being American, politically conservative, and Orthodox a tough thing to pull off. It is not easy to sit in Republican Party meetings and be true to one's Orthodoxy. I could give numerous examples of this, but one representative anecdote should suffice.
She got an ovation for that. A standing ovation. I responded that, leaving aside the fact that mass killing is just plain wrong, there is also the sticky problem that 33% of the population of Lebanon is actually Christian. My comments were greeted with silence. Angry silence. The fact is that Orthodox Christians are a bad fit for the Religious Right, and the Republican Party which it dominates at the grassroots level. Many of us try to get along with the current core of the Republican Party, mostly because we really feel like we should be doing something about abortion, fiscal irresponsibility, bloated government, and preserving personal liberty. But it isn't easy. I've been clashing with other Republicans the most lately over Russian policy. I consider Russia to be just another great power, somewhat in decline, that is acting normally concerning its sphere of influence in neighboring countries. Many of my Republican Party cohorts consider Russia to be spawned from Hell and destined to unleash the Antichrist. It makes co-operation on issues of mutual concern difficult, to say the least. This is not to say that many Orthodox haven't bought into the Religious Right. Many big name conservative, Orthodox Websites and authors are enthusiastic about carving out a niche for Orthodoxy somewhere between Eagle Forum and the Christian Coalition. Orthodox of this mindset focus singularly on certain domestic issues such as abortion, gay marriage, Euthanasia, and tax policy to the exclusion of almost anything else. When the Orthodox of this disposition do focus on foreign policy, they tend to focus on the Clash of Civilizations with Islam, and tend to avoid questions of policy towards Serbia, Russia, Kosovo, and Georgia - though some Orthodox writers did wade neck-deep into the whole South Ossetia morass. These same writers/activists also tend to think of the United States in messianic terms, even though Orthodoxy provides them no religious basis for this attitude (unlike certain strains of Evangelicalism). This leads some Orthodox to develop an angry mentality in which sinful people, who need to be led to Christ, are treated as political maggots in need of squashing. This inevitably results in Websites, magazines, and other media which are angry, bitter, shrill, and nationalistic. The ideas on-offer read the same as if they had been published in pamphlets distributed by the Christian Coalition. There seems to be no effort among such Orthodox to speak truth to power, or to stand for the witness of the historic faith. Rather, many online and print efforts seem to break down into partisan apologetics - whatever is Republican is good, whatever is Democrat is bad. Never mind the fact that both parties are frequently wrong. Whatever is put forward by the guys with the ‘R' next to their names must be the way to go. And if you aren't with the program, by opposing the Iraq War (for example), then prepare to get hit in the face with two-tons of pure venom. This is has been too much for a lot of politically conservative Orthodox who can't get into this Born-Again, hyper-partisan mindset. Some are leaving political activity altogether to focus more on Orthodox Evangelism. Others, like me, soldier on in the Republican Party, and hope for better times in the future. We make our disagreements known, and when possible, support candidates (Ron Paul in my case) that speak to our worldview.
As you can probably tell from what I've written earlier, I can sympathize with Schaeffer. He came out of the Religious Right, as did I, but now seems to have rejected the conservative agenda entirely. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, since much of the conservative agenda, at least as defined by the Bush Administration, really needs to be rejected. In his last blog on the Huffington Post, Schaeffer seems to lament the passing of the old Republican Party:
I would have to agree with that assessment, though I'm not sure how this equals to full-throated support for Obama. To say that Obama is the most openly pro-homosexual rights and most pro-abortion president ever elected is probably an understatement. That supporting abortion rights and normalizing homosexuality are non-Orthodox positions should be indisputable. However, I understand that in politics you usually have to settle for a quarter-of-a-loaf, instead of the whole thing. That being the case, I would have been willing to overlook Obama's manifest flaws if I actually thought that he would initiate a foreign policy that would:
The fact is, however, I don't expect anything like that out of Obama. I expect Obama's foreign policy to be just as belligerent as that of President Bush, if not more so. I expect more wars in places like Africa, more military spending, and more military bases overseas. I expect him to be aggressively anti-Serb and anti-Russian, and to keep rolling NATO right up to the Kremlin's front porch, even if this lands us into a war. Hillary Clinton, after all, appears to be headed for Secretary of State. (Anyone mistaking Hillary for a peacenik has been in a coma for 20 years.) You add all that to his support for abortion on-demand and his other questionable social policies, and to me, Obama is a total wash. Schaeffer doesn't see it that way, and perhaps he is right. Time will tell in the end, and I would love to be pleasantly surprised by some good moves on Obama's part. I'm not holding my breath, though. What is more evident than ever, however, is that on questions of public policy, Orthodox Christians need to find their own voice. On some issues we are on the same side as the Religious Right, but the natural Orthodox style of dealing with those issues is markedly different. Orthodoxy is not shrill. Orthodoxy is power and truth. Our bishops rarely yell. They usually speak softly, but they do so with authority and with love. But while our style is very different, this fact doesn't equal some kind of capitulation to the world. Rather it speaks of greater spiritual maturity. But on many issues we are not at all on the same page as the Religious Right. Trying to pretend that we are means that we have to compromise ourselves as Orthodox Christians. The same thing happens with Orthodox who try to fit into the Religious Left, like Schaeffer seems to be doing. While they may fit in on some issues like environmental policy, the commitment of the the Religious Left to normalizing aberrant behaviors like abortion has got to be as unnerving for Democratic-leaning Orthodox as it is for me to put up with the mad bombers. Many Orthodox, like me, find themselves holding a complex assortment of positions which defy easy characterization as left or right, liberal or conservative. We are simply not at home in the current political landscape, because we defy the normal stereotypes. Which, to me, indicates the need for Orthodox Christians to actively transform the political dialogue. It is time for Orthodox Christians to start leading the discussion, instead jumping up and down in the crowd yelling, "Me too!" That means that our online forums for discussion need to stop mirroring the anger, bitterness, and blind partisanship of a Daily Kos or a Redstate.com. We need to speak truth to power, and to embrace the moral tradition of the Church, even if it is inconvenient politically for our side, whichever side that may be. It also means that we need to stop excoriating Orthodox Christians, like Frank Schaeffer, who have made political choices we don't agree with. We need to assume that such choices are made prayerfully, in good faith, and with valid reasons. If we can talk to each other sensibly, as Orthodox Christians, and quit trying to conform to external influences, then perhaps, just perhaps, we can start to build a consensus as to what our civic duties and responsibilities are as Orthodox Christians who are also Americans.            
Comments (19)
I do not agree
written by orange blossom, December 02, 2008
"I would have been willing to overlook Obama's manifest flaws if I actually thought that he would initiate a foreign policy..."
Pro-abortion is more than a "flaw." In fact it is one of the only political issues on which the Church has an official stand. No, thank you.
Sure the Church has an official stance on abortion.
written by Glen Chancy, December 02, 2008 Pro-abortion is more than a "flaw." In fact it is one of the only political issues on which the Church has an official stand. The official position of the church is the correct one. Abortion is a moral evil and must be opposed. But abortion can't trump all other issues that are also involving life. I would never say, "Hey I support Obama more than McCain because he is better on tax breaks for the middle class." But not bombing children, not starting unconstitutional wars, not getting us into renewed conflicts with Russia, not supporting the bombing of Lebanese Christians by Israeli jets - these are also life issues. Life and death are bigger than abortion. The dead Serbian babies that Clinton killed are just as dead as aborted babies thrown in trash cans. If Obama had given me life issues on which he was better than McCain, then I would have considered throwing a ballot for him. He didn't. Not in the slightest, which is why he didn't get my vote. I voted 3rd Party. John McCain and other candidates like him are not at all pro-life. They may oppose domestic abortion, but on issues involving foreign conflict, the use of lethal force against civilian populations, and related issues - they are decidedly pro-death. Being anti-abortion doesn't buy you a pass on everything else. That was, of course, a major point of this article. That from an Orthodox perspective, both choices are exceptionally flawed. We end up in totally unproductive arguments, like this one which has no real point to it. After all, I didn't vote for Obama but was merely posing a hypothetical condition under which I would have considered voting for him. The goal is to get past this current impasse. We need to get to a point where at least one candidate is acceptable on all major points of concern for Orthodox Christians. I do not think we will get there trying to play by the rules of other faith traditions. We will get there by standing fast for our own ideals. They must bend to us, not us to them.
Have you gone crazy ?
written by Steve J., December 03, 2008
Wow, what an insane article. Have you totally lost your mind?
If Syria was not complicit and an accessory to terrorism - and let's see, gee whiz, building a nuclear reactor for the sole purpose of making a nuke maybe they would not be in the hot seat.
a kinder america
written by budd holly, December 03, 2008
I can’t believe it took this long to see Bush for what he is, as the above commenter states. Bush is not some kind of pro-life humanitarian. The Republican Party is not the moral majority. I could never get my head around the fact that republicans pushed so hard for war, handed the banks the key to writing bankruptcy reform, took student loans out of the bankruptcy courts hands, voted against children’s health care, and many many other things that hurt people in need of help.
All these things are un-Christian from what I understand of Christ’s teaching. We as American’s and Orthodox Christians need to get over this one issue politics for the sake of our country. If we don’t, we may not have a country that can help anybody. I voted for Obama, I don’t like some of his liberal views; however I hope this will bring us back to a kinder society that won’t jail people secretly, and think we are stupid enough to listen to double talk. As for his abortion views, I am starting to think this issue is the choice of the person. We have to make choices of doing good or evil every day. A person knows it is wrong to kill a baby, making it illegal is not going to stop them. God knows their heart and will be their judge, along with anyone who participated. We should start considering how we can assist mothers with the root problems that are causing them to consider abortion. I think there are many people that think there are thousands of programs to assist them and there is no reason for abortion. Many people know, if they have children, and a poor paying job that it is very difficult get any type of assistance these days. I have a troubled teen that is ADHD. I looked into getting him into a youth ranch or boot camp for some help. Only to find out it costs between $30,000 to $60,000 a year! The $30,000 is a “Christian organization”. In this society programs like this should be free. We will all pay much more in social services over an ignored troubled teen’s lifetime than paying for a camp. You see we need to start looking at a holistic view instead of just handing our entire government over to any hack that promises to stop abortion. This type of thinking caused over a hundred thousand deaths, and spent a trillion dollars on a war that was a sham. I’m sure there are many out there angry at what I say, but look in the mirror and say it’s not true.
Clarification
written by Glen Chancy, December 03, 2008
Perhaps you could be a little more civil? You said:
Wow, what an insane article. Have you totally lost your mind? Let us assume that everything you said is true about Syria. Does that justify the total destruction of Damascus and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, including tens of thousands of Christians? The death toll would include thousands of Iraqi Christians who are hiding in Syria from the Muslim fundamentalism which has driven them from Iraq. The death toll of such a strike would also include a Patriarch of the Orthodox Church. Is this justifiable? The Dispensationalist camp claims that it is, and this is God\'s will for Israel to do it, and for the U.S. to support it. What do you think?
Refreshing
written by Jim K., December 03, 2008
I can't tell you how refreshing I find this dicussion. I've been interested in the Orthodox view for the past few years and several times have visited a local Orthodox Church through their community outreach. Coming from a fundamentalist Christian denomination, I am having to think more deeply than ever before about beliefs I have held almost out of habit.
Thank you. Let's do keep the discussion going and on a higher, more civil level.
my 2 cents
written by Art Samouris, December 03, 2008
The Dispensationalist view presented here sounds insane. On the other hand (sort of) Clinton's response to terrorism was a huge mistake. I believe the answer lies somewhere in the middle. We don't knowingly kill civilians as part of our policy. Unfortunately it happens in war. Waiting to strike at our enemies until everything is perfectly safe means doing nothing. Bush is not the devil nor the dumbest president we have had. Obama is not the messiah nor the smartest president(elect). Let's work toward solving problems and not to finger pointing.
Honest Question
written by Jim K., December 03, 2008
Please don't see this as provocation or picking a fight. I am honestly curious about what the Church might see as a legitimate reason to go to war and then what mode would be acceptable.
Yes, innocents do suffer and/or die in an armed conflict. I'm not defending that, but isn't it to be expected, even if our cause is righteous? I don't intend for that to sound callous, but up to what point should we stand by and allow unbridled nuclear proliferation, ethnic cleansing, torture and/or mistreatment of the masses?
Great Question
written by Glen Chancy, December 03, 2008
Great question, and one that does not have an easy answer. The first resource to start with is a publication called "The Orthodox Church and Society" which has an entry on War and Peace. You can find it here:
http://incommunion.org/article...ciety/viii Father Hopko and Father Harakas, two of our best known Theological writers, have taken some issue with the attempt (reflected here) to adopt Just War Theory into Eastern Orthodoxy. I am sympathetic to their case, because it is not that far a jump from saying that a specific war is permissible, to then making it an obligation. Orthodox Theologians are very careful to not turn warfare into some kind of positive good as it was during the Crusades. You don't kill your way to God's kingdom. However, I like this publication a lot, and have used it in framing my own thinking. What is very important is this section: Among obvious signs pointing to the equity or inequity of a warring party are its war methods and attitude towards its war prisoners and the civilians of the opposite side, especially children, women and elderly. Even in the defence from an aggression, every kind of evil can be done, making one’s spiritual and moral stand not superior to that of the aggressor. War should be waged with righteous indignation, not maliciousness, greed and last (1 Jn. 2:16) and other fruits of hell. A war can be correctly assessed as a feat or a robbery only after an analysis is made of the moral state of the warring parties. “Rejoice not over thy greatest enemy being dead, but remember that we die all”, Holy Scriptures says (Sirach). Christian humane attitude to the wounded and war prisoners is based on the words of St. Paul: “If thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink; for so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good” (Rom. 12:21-22). Even if you are just in applying force to a given situation, you must always be aware that yielding to hate and revenge in your actions can void your cause. Hence, justice can be perverted by pursuing perverse means such as torture, targeting civilians, or other such actions. In war as in any other sphere of human interactions - all is not fair. Here is Father Harakas with his view: http://incommunion.org/?p=388 There was a book published in 2004 (I believe) called the Virtue of War by Father Daniel Webster. I liked his approach on many fronts, but I think he was was too zealous in his attempts to prove that the Iraq War (in specific) was just. Some parts of the book seemed forced, because the Iraq War was not, by any stretch, a textbook example of Just War Theory. OCN did an interview with him here: http://www.myocn.net/index.php...f-War.html A written interview is here: http://www.myocn.net/index.php...bster.html Feel free to share any of your own research as well.
Father
written by Steven Allen, December 03, 2008
Importance of a Whole Orthodox Worldview
Many thanks to Mr. Chancy on several counts: Sticking up for Orthodox Christians who are victims of an immoral US foreign policy, pointing out that the Republicans are not God's anointed, pointing out that the theology of a great deal of what passes for Christianity in this country is not only heresy but ridiculous heresy, pointing out that the people who believe in this heresy do not regard Christian Serbs or Palestinians or Iraqis as human beings, much less Christians - the list could go on. I should like to go deeper, however, and ask this question: Why should Orthodox Christians take for granted that we should live in secular humanist democracies at all? All contemporary governments, whether "capitalist" or "socialist," derive their ideology from anti-Christian 18th century Enlightenment ideas like the "sovereign will of the people" and "separation of church and state," like the myth of egalitarianism, in short, on the ideology of Freemasonry, which led to the French Revolution, the Lincoln Revolution, the Russian Revolution, the FDR Revolution, the welfare state, the "civil rights movement (actually an engineered marxist revolution), the sexual revolution, etc, leading right up to, and logically to, the current stage of the dialectic, the Obama Revolution. All contemporary societies in the former Christendom can be traced back to an "original sin" of rebellion against anointed Christian kings, either through simply taking away all of the traditional powers of the monarch or outright overthrow of the monarchy, including, in the most important cases - France and Russia - actual regicide. All of the governments of the former Christendom have disestablished the traditional Church in their countries (except for that of Greece, which is working towards it). This is EVIL. The Constantinian era of Church history, the symphonia of altar and throne, was provided by God so that more souls could be saved than could or can ever be saved in a "catacomb" situation. Only heretics and sectarians believe that Orthodox Monarchies were a fundamentally bad thing. Heretics and sectarians gave us modern "democracy." We must pray for God to once again raise up an Orthodox Tsar to smite the enemies of the Faith, uphold the rights of Christ the King and His Church, and put off the Day of Judgment! To survive spiritually we must realize that both of the official parties in the U.S., and all "secular democratic" parties in power throughout the world, whether labeled left or right, capitalist or communist, are the tools of an ongoing Revolution that has toppled the altars and thrones of Christendom (East and West) and is intent upon nothing less than the complete destruction of true Christianity and the creation of a "global spirituality" as the opium of the masses. I strongly recommend chapters 17-21 of the biography of Fr. Seraphim Rose published by St. Herman Press, especially chapter 20. Here we see the future Fr. Seraphim (Eugene Rose) developing what became his complete and mature Orthodox view of the history of Christian civilization. This could be a starting point for a lot of us to develop a comprehensive Orthodox view of history and current events, and so avoid the pitfall of doing exactly what the Revolution wants us to do, which is waste our energy cheering for one side or the other (the left of the Democrats or the false right of the Republicans)in the Punch and Judy show they provide in the media and the elections, to keep us distracted from what is really going on. in Christ, Fr. Steven Allen St. Spyridon Church St. Clair Shores, Michigan
...
written by Roland, December 03, 2008
Many of us old-fashioned, non-Dispensationalist Reagan Republicans - including many Orthodox Christians - support an assertive US foreign policy, including expansion of NATO, for the same reasons we always have: we believe totalitarianism must always be resisted, whether it manifests as communism, fascism, political Islam, or neo-communist nationalism. The current government of Russia falls into that last category, as did the government of Serbia until quite recently. I, as an Orthodox American, do not feel obligated to support the policies of the Russian and Serbian governments just because their ancestors were Orthodox.
My Orthodox Faith and Politics at this moment
written by Margaret Mueller, December 03, 2008
What bothers me, is that most of those "dispensationalist" folks don't seem to know that the Orthodox are Christians. It didn't occur to them when the Soviet Union dissolved that, for seventy years, Christians in Russia had held onto their faith, and considered their unshaken faith the reason that Communism finally failed. They don't know that there are Arabic speaking Christians whose Churches are older than the one in Rome, and say the Lord's Prayer to Allah -- in the Trinity, not the "Allah" of Islam. They don't understand that Orthodox Christians have been flogged into defeat at the behest of American foreign policy. But, I don't think they really care, either. You see we Orthodox aren't born again, we have images in our Churches that don't look like the images in American Churches, we baptized infants and go to Confession. WE are not even on their Christian radar.
Voting as an Orthodox Christian does not mean advocating for more taxes and more social programs. It does mean recognizing evil does exist in the world, and that at some point we will fight evil which is not morally ambiguous. It does mean that we should be meeting the needs of the poor both as individuals [one-on-one] and through our Churches. How many Orthodox Churches in America have a daily soup kitchen? deliver meals to seniors or disabled? Have a food closet? Have a clothing closet? Provide winter shelter for the homeless in their buildings? THIS is living our faith as a community! Christ did not advocate government social programs, or taxing people to support more and more government programs. He taught that we should all meet the personal, individual needs of every other person as we meet them -- at our own expense. He understood if we are to grow in the Holy Spirit we must live as though every person we encounter is Christ/God Himself. I think we need to understand that government and social workers who are doing a job do not replace the soul-altering, psychologically transforming love of one human being caring for another. However well meaning, Bureaucracy does not replace our relationship with the image of Christ in each person. Living a Christ-like life is the path to salvation. It can't be confused with voting Republican or Democrat, there are people on both sides caring for individuals. However, when one party or another seeks to dictate the beliefs of a Church through legal or legislative methods, that should be a concern of everyone. The Orthodox Church is not a democracy. The Orthodox Church does not define who God is; God has revealed Himself to us. We do not define the terms of salvation, or righteous living; God has given us His Law. There is a growing segment of American society that believes God to be a myth, and as a myth, has been defined by man. This segment of society also thinks that the Law given us by God is based upon man's fears, insecurities, and superstition, not God's Holy Wisdom. Because they seek to marginalize Orthodox Christian beliefs and practice, they must attack those things in Churches that they perceive as "human creations," not recognizing God as creator. It is only by strategically attacking God and His Laws within the context of Church that "social and political reason" can prevail -- for the benefit of those who wish to live lives without boundaries. We as a people have not looked back at the last thirty years of social change to analyze the real impacts and costs of those changes. Because we have not honestly looked at those changes which have diminished the honesty, kindness, love, generosity, humility -- and, yes, morality, of our people, we are not able to effectively discuss, critique or refute the changes that are being introduced now. This is a deficiency of our media, which studiously avoids any such analysis. It is an analysis that Christians do engage. Many assumptions are made by media and Christians which are in error, if examined. My responses to what you, and others have written have ranged wildly. I apologize for that. The common thread is my Orthodox faith and the political climate we live in.
Good for you
written by CMB, December 03, 2008
I have given all of these topics a large amount of thought over the past several years, and I'm glad there is an Orthodox conversation going on. We need to use our knowledge of truth for good-in whatever form we can, using the gifts we have. The article tackles an important issue which we need to find a way to address on a larger scale.
Party affiliation & planks:I too am a Ron Paul supporter. I switched my party registration from Libertarian to Republican so I could vote for him in the primary, like many others did. I wrote him in in the general election. I have switched back to Libertarian. He was undoubtedly the best candidate. I know a lot of Orthodox supporters. Yea! Not necessarily supporting the republican party which is high jacked for sure by these "end times" groups. The 2 party system is broken, and we saw it on display this cycle. War: You simply cannot support the wholesale killing of our own military service people and innocent civilians abroad in unconstitutional war, and in a war of aggression by the US. You cannot blame the Iraqi's and Afghani's for feeling totally raped by the US for invading their country, bombing innocent people, destroying infrastructure, and giving constant fodder to the extremists to continue their 'jihad' against the US. The war was done for profit, like all war. Support the troops-Bring them home. Watch Obama carefully-I'm certain ALL of the current profiteers are expecting him to start several conflicts during his tenure. My prediction, Rahm Emmanuel will ensure everything stays the same. (I pray for the opposite) Political activism: We can support politicians who are closely related to our Orthodox being, but we cannot expect righteousness, salvation or humanitarian empathy from government. We have to do that as Christians on our own with the help of God. We can vocally object to unconstitutional acts by gov't, we can publish web sites and letters, and have discussions. Thank God! But if we don't protect our liberty to do so, we will have a bigger problem. We need to work on orthodox unity so we have a voice interjected in to the conversation where the Dispensationalists live. I think we did see that during this election cycle to some degree. I'd love the "religious right" to HEAR other points of view, and consider another path.. I never let anyone lump me into that moniker. Re:Russia, Iran, Pakistan, etc.:Human beings live there. The US will bomb them if it is good for Halliburton and Kellog Brown and Root. They print fiat currency with the help of the Federal Reserve, at our children's expense. Whilst the Fed is still in control, no amount of public opinion will stop another unconstitutional, war of aggression. Israel:Obama has always been an outspoken supporter of Israel.So has McCain. Nothing will 'change' in regards to financially supporting and politically posturing to support them, even though they kill innocents all the time, and the separation wall is an atrocity. I would be thrilled if Obama or McCain or ANYBODY would put their foot down with Israel--just turn off the faucet, and see how the Islamic extremists react (not that they are justified-their thinking is obviously flawed). It would be interesting, wouldn't it? It would save lives too. I wish the Palestinian fighters would stop lobbing rockets, and I wish Israeli's would stop demolishing houses and raiding refugee camps. But if the US funds them, and doesn't publicly condemn them there is no change. Ultimately as Orthodox, we have to constantly check ourselves to be sure we are doing our best to be that icon of Christ in our thoughts and actions (difficult, I know), and then look for ways to educate others about the errors of government, and the eternal truths of Christ. Peace.
Thank you...an important conversation
written by Darrin Roush, December 04, 2008
Thank you for starting this conversation...it is a topic that needs more discussion among Orthodox Christians. Many of the responses reflect some of my thinking as well. "Thinking" is the key word there. Let's not drink the Kool-Aid, no matter what the source.
To clear things up about..
written by Ksenia, December 04, 2008
Interesting. You say that you support Frank in his decision, yet categorize Obama bitterly with Bush. Contrary to your pro-homosexual claim of Obama, he has said in one of his speeches NOT to allow gay marriage. Also, you claim that he probably hates Russia and the like. Actually, Obama wants to consult with the leaders of those countries on delicate issues. All the while you say is like Bush, but I don't see any similarity at all. If anyone was like Bush (and you'll flame me for this
 ), it's McCain. He strongly feels that Russia is a horrible place and has no desire for parlay with Russian leaders. Otherwise, I see your argument very valid and I applaud you for speaking out against the common ignorance of the Republican Club. Sadly, I see this everyday in my fellow Americans(most of whom are Protestant, *sigh*). The Russian situation is quite ironic, isn't it? But persecution by the world is the true Christian's destiny, since we are not of this world, but of the Lord.
You should read more closely
written by Glen Chancy, December 04, 2008 Also, you claim that he probably hates Russia and the like. Actually, Obama wants to consult with the leaders of those countries on delicate issues. All the while you say is like Bush, but I don't see any similarity at all. If anyone was like Bush (and you'll flame me for thissmilies/sad.gif), it's McCain. He strongly feels that Russia is a horrible place and has no desire for parlay with Russian leaders. I never said Obama hates Russia. I simply stated that I don't expect Obama's foreign policy to be any different than one I would expect out of McCain. So far, I think his appointments bear this out. With no major difference on foreign policy, and a ton of domestic policies I don't support, Obama didn't do much to attract me. Neither did McCain. If you are correct and there is a substantial improvement in U.S. foreign policy, I will be thrilled. The election being over, at this point we can now look ahead to what will actually happen. But here is my question to you - suppose there isn't a sea change? Obama may have said he opposes gay marriage, but what if his domestic policy is different? What if he actively pursues hate crime legislation that practically destroys free speech as has happened in Canada? What if his foreign policy presents no real change? What if his economic policies are nothing more than one give away to Wall Street after another. Will you criticize Obama over such things? Will you speak truth to power, if the criticism hurts your presumed side of the political debate?
Father Allen
written by Charles Martel, December 19, 2008
I thing Father Allen is absolutely correct. However, I would suggest that everyone simply search for Father Seraphim Rose "Nihilism." This is his seminal work on the condition of our current state, politically speaking. I would also recommend "The Myth of Democracy," by Tage Lindbom.
I would like to respectfully disagree with a number of authors on this page, including the author. There have been a LOT of lies and leftist propaganda regarding not only the war in Iraq but President Bush. Is he the greatest president ever? Of course not. Is he the worst? Not even close (that would be Carter). However, his approach to the war against the Muslim terrorists is at least partially correct. The war needs to be taken to them. And, yes, despite the lies, there were terrorist ties with Iraq (they were training 2000 foreign-born terrorists a year for four years before we invaded). The 550 metric tons of uranium yellowcake, whether known by authorities or not, simply points to a program not declared according to the cease-fire and in direct violation of UN agreements. They were buying off Russia, France and Germany with oil fields. And let's not forget Oil-For-Food. The simple fact of the matter is that Iraq very much was a danger. Nobody lied about it, and Bush isn't Hitler. I, too, came from a evangelical, "born again" background." However, to equate this with the "religious right," or that the "religious right" somehow controls the Republican party is absolute nonsense. If that were true, McCain never would have been nominated. The idea of some monolithic "religious right," characterized as it is in this article, is a joke in and of itself. Simply because the leftist mainstream media attempts to paint the Republicans in such a manner doesn't mean it's true. In fact, I would think that such a characterization by the leftist media would be the first indication that the characterization is untrue - just as it lied about Obama for months on end to hide things. As far as Obama is concerned, the fact that he is personally pro-homosexual is one thing, but he doesn't want to legalize gay marriage (knowing how little support that gets in the black community, as illustrated here in California with the passage of Prop 8. I wonder why the homosexual activists aren't picketing the black churches?) He is, make no mistake, virulently pro-abortion. His own church, too, is little more than a black supremacist/Marxist derivation of liberation "theology." His connections with a myriad of rabid anti-Christian Marxists was enough for me to never vote for the man. That his past was covered up in the public realm was not surprising. As far as Russia is concerned: antagonize? What, are you kidding? Russia is a violently belligerent government (NOT the people, notice, the government) run by former KGB men who, I have no doubt - looking at their recent actions - aren't the least bit interested in a peaceful existence. Empire is the only goal. That is why the Ukraine has, since this last summer, been preparing for the expected invasion from Russia. One acquaintance informed me that, just this last August, while visiting the Black Sea, she witness the Ukraine military going through military exercises and explained that it was a broadly accepted belief that a Russian invasion was inevitable, especially with an Obama win. (Remember, Biden already warned us about how Obama would react to the international crisis that Obama's very election would elicit). In the end, then, Russia is creating its own situation. It hasn't passed up a single opportunity to deal with tyrannical madmen (Ira, Venezuela, Cuba, Iraq before the war, Syria, etc.). I don't think isolationism is necessarily Orthodox. There is a great book "The Virtue of War" by Alexander F.C. Webster and Darrell Cole, that, I think, makes a very strong argument regarding war and Orthodoxy (and other Christian traditions). By the by, Webster, 5 years previously, had written a book on the pacifist view in Orthodoxy - very interesting. In any event, as I, in my cold-addled rambling here, would simply like to point out that a lot of our common misunderstandings regarding the current political situation and what is left and right has to do with the purposeful redefinition of those positions by leftists. How else could the lies about so much of history have survived so long? (Lies like the Rosenbergs were innocent, "redistribution" isn't Marxism, fascism is "right wing"). That is why I think Fr. Allen is right to point out Fr. Rose's "Nihilism" as an excellent guide to why we are where we are. I think it is also important to understand history, true history - not revisionist history - to understand the true evil of what we are facing as both Americans and, far more importantly, as Orthodox Christians. the sinner, Charles
Some responses written by Glen Chancy, December 20, 2008 There have been a LOT of lies and leftist propaganda regarding not only the war in Iraq but President Bush. Is he the greatest president ever? Actually, some of President Bush's harshest and most eloquent critics have come from the Right-wing of the spectrum. The so-called leftist critics are about to embrace the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. They disliked the wars because Bush was a Republican. Nation-building wars tend to be a 'progressive' specialty, so I expect that the Democratic Party will do a full pivot and become the party in favor of continuing and expanding both wars. Of course not. Is he the worst? Not even close (that would be Carter). Define worst. I would rank Johnson with his Great Society that set the stage for our current bankruptcy, Roosevelt with his New Deal which worsened the Great Depression, Wilson with his interventionism that created the mess in Central Europe, and Truman with his Korean stalemate as much, much worse than Carter. Bush's major flaw, and that of the Republican Party, has been fiscal irresponsibility that is likely to tank our economy. The massive spending on wars that we can't afford is just part of this. Borrowing money from the Chinese to build schools and bridges in Iraq is just plain nuts. However, his approach to the war against the Muslim terrorists is at least partially correct. The war needs to be taken to them. And, yes, despite the lies, there were terrorist ties with Iraq (they were training 2000 foreign-born terrorists a year for four years before we invaded). The 550 metric tons of uranium yellowcake, whether known by authorities or not, simply points to a program not declared according to the cease-fire and in direct violation of UN agreements. They were buying off Russia, France and Germany with oil fields. And let's not forget Oil-For-Food. The simple fact of the matter is that Iraq very much was a danger. Nobody lied about it, and Bush isn't Hitler. None of the assertions in the previous paragraph are factual, as has been refuted by a wide scope of writers. You can provide no evidence for any of them. I would not be surprised if you simply pulled them out of memory. I never said Bush was Hitler, so if you plan to deal with me then how about confining your comments to things I actually wrote? But if the war needs to be brought home to Muslim terrorists, then why attack a secular regime such as that of Hussein? Why create a terrorist-dominated state known as Kosovo in the Balkans? Why push for Turkey in NATO? Why create conditions in Iraq that bring religiously affiliated Shia parties to power, and enable a 'Shia crescent' extending from Iran all the way to the coast of Lebanon? I, too, came from a evangelical, "born again" background." However, to equate this with the "religious right," or that the "religious right" somehow controls the Republican party is absolute nonsense. In the primary season, conservative Christians were split. Some went Huckabee, some McCain (war hero), some went Romney (despite the Mormomism), and some even backed Guiliani. McCain was not the first choice of many Christian conservatives, but he was the first choice of enough of them to win the nomination. All candidates, however, that had a shot at the nomination were largely in agreement on the issues about which this article was written. If that were true, McCain never would have been nominated. The idea of some monolithic "religious right," characterized as it is in this article, is a joke in and of itself. Simply because the leftist mainstream media attempts to paint the Republicans in such a manner doesn't mean it's true. In fact, I would think that such a characterization by the leftist media would be the first indication that the characterization is untrue - just as it lied about Obama for months on end to hide things. Ron Paul is an Evangelical Christian who ran against the preferred foreign policy of the Religious Right. He was the subject of smears, lies, and distortions. We heard that Ron Paul was racist, was anti-American, was anti-Jew, etc. Those did not come from the Leftist press, those came from the Religious Right. There are certain issues which the Religious Right has ruled out-of-bounds for discussion within the Republican Party, and on those topics you must conform or face defeat as a candidate. Foreign policy is one of those areas. If you toe the line on foreign policy, then your domestic issues can be suspect and no one much cares. Just look at the way Joe Lieberman is embraced by so many members of the Religious Right. He is as liberal as the day is long on all manner of social issues, but he is a hawk on Israel and is anti-Russian - which makes him acceptable to most of the Religious Right. As far as Obama is concerned, the fact that he is personally pro-homosexual is one thing, but he doesn't want to legalize gay marriage (knowing how little support that gets in the black community, as illustrated here in California with the passage of Prop 8. I wonder why the homosexual activists aren't picketing the black churches?) He is, make no mistake, virulently pro-abortion. His own church, too, is little more than a black supremacist/Marxist derivation of liberation "theology." His connections with a myriad of rabid anti-Christian Marxists was enough for me to never vote for the man. That his past was covered up in the public realm was not surprising. Obama is a hack politician from Chicago. My impression is that Obama uses his Christian faith in the time honored method of most pols - to get votes. He went to his former church for the connections to the power elite it provided him. Based on his appointments to office, I would say he is no more radical than Bill Clinton. That is why he dropped his former church when it became a liability. He is part of the Chicago machine. They don't have friends, they have allies. Alliances change based on need. There will be no more Marxism or Black Liberation in the Obama regime than in any other standard-issue Democratic Regime. As far as Russia is concerned: antagonize? What, are you kidding? Russia is a violently belligerent government (NOT the people, notice, the government) run by former KGB men who, I have no doubt - looking at their recent actions - aren't the least bit interested in a peaceful existence. Empire is the only goal. Which is why after Georgia launched a war in South Ossetia and burned the capital, Russia responded by destroying Tblisi, killing thousands of Georgians, and occupying the country. No wait - that didn't happen. Russia didn't do that at all. So which actions are you talking about that prove the Russian Government is only interested in power? If there is a war between Russia and the Ukriane - what will be the cause of the war? What will the war be fought over? Will it be fought to shift the border to the West so that the 35% of Ukrainians that actually Russians will be reunited with Russia? My concern with your diatribe is that you seem to be irrational, and then project that irrationality onto others. Russia, to me, is pursuing a set of rational policies. These may conflict with our policies, but courting Chavez (for example) makes sense from the Russian perspective. Bringing ethnic Russians back into Russia, where they want to be, or returning tit-for-tat by backing anti-American regimes while we back anti-Russian regimes is just international politics. If we want the game played differently, then we need to respect their sphere of influence in exchange for us respecting theirs.
Chavez isn't crazy. He is a leftist wanna-be dictator, but that doesn't make him crazy. Syria is headed by an opthamologist schooled in the UK. He isn't crazy either. You suffer from a real issue - any policy which runs counter to your ideas is deemed crazy. None of these people are madmen. They are rational actors with visions of the future that differ radically in many ways from our own. That is the nature of the international system, nations define their interests and these interests often conflict. That doesn't mean we can't deal with them, that is the art of diplomacy, backed up when force only when dealing with issues over which no compromise is possible. The purpose behind calling them crazy is to paint us into a corner so that only war is a viable option. After all - can't deal with nutcases can you? Remember Hitler! But if they aren't nutcases, then a deal is often possible. We can't afford any more wars at this stage. We're broke, or haven't you noticed? Therefore, we had best back off the rhetoric and learn to deal with people we don't like. I don't think isolationism is necessarily Orthodox. There is a great book "The Virtue of War" by Alexander F.C. Webster and Darrell Cole, that, I think, makes a very strong argument regarding war and Orthodoxy (and other Christian traditions). By the by, Webster, 5 years previously, had written a book on the pacifist view in Orthodoxy - very interesting. I like this book, in the whole. Isolationsim as defined as a political movement in the interwar United States was not pacifism. Most people who espouse a traditional foreign policy (based on Washington and Jefferson's examples) are not pacifists in the slightest. But neither do they espouse reckless interventionism which is the current vision on offer. The opposite of interventionist isn't pacifist. There is a whole range of positions in-between the two which are quite logical. I hope your cold gets better.
Write comment
|
Are you an Orthodox Christian with friends or relatives in or around Damascus, Syria? Do you belong to the Antiochian jurisdiction, and so have ties to Syria that way? If so, you might want to notify all your Syrian contacts that Damascus, ancient seat of civilization and the home of the Patriarch of Antioch along with thousands of Christians, is about to be destroyed by Israel.
In early 2008, I was the speaker at a Republican Club dinner. My speech was centered on the topics of terrorism and the treatment of Christians in Muslim states. After my talk, during the Q&A period, the president of the club stood up and proclaimed that Israel had a right to obliterate Lebanon to get at Hezbollah. The sentiment, "Kill ‘em all and let God sort them out!" comes close to describing the gist of what she said.
But others, like Frank Schaeffer, seem to be jumping off the right-wing ship entirely. Frank Schaeffer, writing in the 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| < Prev |
|---|
AMEN!