Grove City professor criticizes the thinking behind Ruether's call to the churches to bear witness against the "American messianic nationalism" of our time

A critical response to Dr. Ruether’s call to the churches has come from Dr. Earl H. Tilford, Jr., Ph.D., Professor of History at Grove City College.  This essay was written for publication elsewhere, but he has offered to share it here.  [4-2-04]

A response to Tilford:  Bob Smith, a Viet Nam Green Beret veteran, responds to Earl Tilford's criticism of Rosemary Radford Ruether's Call to the Churches to bear witness against the "American messianic nationalism" of our time.   Dr. Tilford draws on his own military experience to argue against Ruether, and Smith, also speaking as a veteran, argues that Christ offers a better alternative than military force.

Do you know what you believe?

            In October 1999, I spoke in Abu Dhabi at a conference on the twenty-first century sponsored by the United Arab Emirates Center for Strategic Studies and Research. The audience was composed almost entirely of Moslems; soldiers, scholars, imams and government officials from throughout the Persian Gulf region.

After futurist Alvin Toffler delivered the keynote address Zbigniew Brzezinski, former secretary of state in Jimmy Carter’s administration, discussed the future of the nation state in the twenty-first century and the chairman of the board of the British Broadcast Corporation talked about the role of the media.  My topic was, “the Future of War.” 

Accordingly, I posited a future in which international terrorists groups supported by rogue regimes, some armed with weapons of mass destruction, threaten the established order.  I forecasted sharp increases in ethnic and religious strife and noted such conflicts cannot be addressed effectively with precise surgical strikes from high flying bombers.  In ethnic and religious clashes along what Harvard Professor Samuel P. Huntington described as “cultural fault lines”, passions engender hatreds which escalate quickly into genocidal warfare.  Nevertheless, I concluded war will remain as nineteenth century Prussian philosopher Carl von Clausewitz proclaimed in his 1832 classic On War, “an act of force to compel the enemy to do our will.”

            In the question and answer period following my presentation, a colonel from one of the Gulf state armies asked if I thought a war between the Christian West and the Islamic world was inevitable.  His inquiry surprised me since I had developed friendships with many Moslem officers during my military career and going to war with them never occurred to me. I replied that Christians and Moslems “share many sacred values, like caring for the poor, and have a common view of sexual morality.” I sagely concluded, “There is no reason for enmity between peoples who worship the same God.”

            My Moslem inquisitor then handed my philosophical head to me on the proverbial platter. “How can you say we have the same morality when many of your Christian churches support abortion and marry homosexuals?” The Arab colonel also provided this Presbyterian elder a lesson in Trinitarian theology. “Do you know what you believe? When you say we ‘worship the same God’ you blaspheme both religions. Moslems worship Allah, the one true God. You are a polytheist whose creeds confirm your worship of three gods.”  Chagrined, my red-faced response was, “You make many important points. Christians and Moslems must be sensitive to one another and find unity in diversity.” It was time to shut up.

            At the center of every culture is a belief system. Strong cultures wrap tightly around a central religious core. Wars are fought between peoples with cultures reflected in their political structures. Al Qaeda is at war with Western culture and its political systems developed over the past two millennia by the amalgamation of Latin, Greek and Germanic-European cultures. Christianity defined and dominated that cultural process. 

Islam’s thrust into the West was not finally halted until the Battle of Zenta in 1697 when Prince Eugene of Savoy annihilated a Turkish army personally commanded by Sultan Mustafa II.  The subsequent Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699 marked the beginning of the demise of the Ottoman Empire. The West that prevailed after 800 years of Moslem onslaught, though divided between often contentious Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox factions, was culturally Christian. Sadly, that is not the case today.

            In the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11, many Christians maintained that the terrorists did not represent Islam; a religion whose name means “submission” with tenets supporting charity and hospitality.  This was unilateral disarmament in the war of worldviews.

Terror is a tool used to affect human will.  Its utility is enhanced when the target’s will is weak. Cultures are an amalgamation of individuals and groups. Islamic culture divides along distinct religious lines between Sunni and Shi’ite and class lines between a poverty-stricken majority and a wealthy minority. In pursuit of multi-culturalism and diversity, post-modern Western civilization purposefully fragmented itself into a cultural smorgasbord of ethnicity, race, class, gender and sexual-orientations.

Ultimately, cultural mantras like, “unity in diversity” are little more than feel-good bumper-stickers. Diversity, a good thing in stock portfolios, wreaks havoc on faith systems and is potentially deadly to a civilization under siege. Can a culturally diverse West withstand concerted attacks by groups who know what they believe and are willing to die for those beliefs? 

In his Second Letter to Timothy, the Apostle Paul wrote, “I know in whom I believe and am persuaded he is able to keep that which I have committed to Him against that day.”  With that day at hand, my Moslem inquisitor’s question still echoes. “Do you know what you believe?”

Earl H. Tilford, Jr., Ph.D.
Professor of History
Grove City College
 

We received this note some days ago, and are happy to post it at last, after the rush of General Assembly.

First of all, thanks for the great web page - it is now my home page.

Please accept my comments in response to Earl H. Tilford, Jr., a Grove City professor, who submitted a critique of "Ruether's Call to the Churches" to bear witness against the "American messianic nationalism" of our time. There are many issues raised by Professor Tilford and I wish to address a few of them.

He says "war will remain as nineteenth century Prussian philosopher Carl von Clausewitz proclaimed". He is right unless we repent and begin to follow the commandments of Christ. We have a choice in life, either to answer the call of the blood of Abel or answer the call of the blood of Jesus. Abel's blood cries out for vengeance, war, and violence; Jesus' blood whispers to our enemies "Peace to you" and of our enemies Jesus prays to God "Forgive them for they know not what they do." It is each person's individual responsibility to choose. Others can't and I should not try to let them choose for me. Muslims can't choose for me my beliefs anymore than they can choose for Tilford. Does he want them to choose his path for him and avoid his own responsibility to love his enemies? Blood will be on the hands of those who use the sword. If you use the sword, don't blame it on your enemy, you made the choice to pick it up. The Lord has said to put your own sword back into its place.

When confronted by a Muslim "inquisitor" (interesting term to use in light of the historical meaning), a Muslim tells him what Tilford believes. I don't know what Tilford believes deep down and the Muslim doesn't either. But I do know what Christ has commanded and those are the words that should guide Christians. I should have expected the response from Tilford to be as it was (basically puritan sexual issues seem to concern him) from a defender of American messianic nationalism rather than the real issues we should be concerned about. Remember what Christ said in Matthew "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you ... have neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. You blind guides ... you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity."

What one Muslim believes we believe is not really that important. What acts of love Christians perform that Muslims see, though, is of utmost importance. Nearly all Muslims I have encountered have been understanding and tolerant of our differences but are quite aware of the hypocrisy shown by American messianic nationalism that avoids the weightier matters like justice, mercy, and faith. That much we do know about what they believe because of the rotten fruit it bears like war, violence, oppression of the poor, sexism, racism, destruction of creation by pollution, etc. which are the fruits of a cruel god not the merciful God of Christianity. We are known by the fruit we bear.

The most egregious statement that Tilford made was "In the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11, many Christians maintained that the terrorists did not represent Islam; ... This was unilateral disarmament in the war of worldviews." I beg to differ in the extreme as "many Christians" were unquestionably right. Terrorists do not represent Islam anymore than Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson represent Christianity or Ariel Sharon represents Judaism. Each of the world's three great religions - Judaism, Christian, and Islam - has extremists and its own terrorists. Judaism has their fascist Zionists. Christianity has our fascist Christian Zionists and American messianic nationalists among others. Islam has their violent jihadists. Each religion needs to reel in and self-police their own radical hateful elements. Thankfully, that is what "Reuther's Call" attempts to do for Christianity.

Christians are not called to be fearfully concerned with others' worldviews, but are called to Christ's worldview. We've known for 6,000 years what the anti-Christ worldview has been. It was described in the beginning of Genesis. "And the LORD said, 'What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground.' " The anti-Christ worldview is painted by the blood of revenge not the blood of forgiveness. The last drop of blood that was shed by Christ ended the need for any more bloodletting. The American messianic nationalist's worldview is not the worldview of the "Prince of Peace."

Bob Smith
Just another Progressive Presbyterian
New Orleans

Bob Smith later added this note:

I forgot to include any credentials yesterday just in case I get attacked by being called un-American or un-patriotic.

I am a Viet Nam Green Beret combat veteran (three tours), veteran of Desert Storm (mobilization), retired from the US Army and Army National Guard of 20 years; retired at the rank of Command Sergeant Major

Just in case someone asks.

Bob Smith