Paradox of Military Strength

Weapons of mass destruction are bad. Most are so bad our minds won't even let us imagine the kinds of horrific, agonizing consequenses they would have on humanity. We not only believe that we must rid the world of WMD, but we also believe we can and should. WMD is generally used to refer to nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.



The United States has some 10,000 functional nuclear bombs and missiles, 15,000 tons of chemical weapons ( nerve gas mostly ) and has refused to end biological weapons research and development as recently as 2001 despite signing the Biological Weapons Convention in 1972 and the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1993 outlawing these weapons. (Israel was among the few that refused to sign.)

We need to ask ourselves seriously why is it wrong to posess weapons of mass destruction and apply the same answer and reasoning to ourselves as we do to others. It is not enough to say that it is okay because "we would never use them". The United States remains the only country on the planet to have used nuclear weapons against another country, and the very real threat of using them again is considered the key to ensuring their continued effectiveness.

If we must stop countries from posessing weapons of mass destruction – does it make sense that we should have these same weapons; using them as a threat to secure the outcome we desire? It is this threat of war that breeds hate and fear and with it totalitarianism that ends democratic and religious freedom.

There is no possible way to reduce the tension that comes from posessing weapons of mass destruction other than from disarmament. We can't expect to reduce tensions and THEN disarm. We must disarm first.

We can be true to our logic of military strength and warfare in only 1 of 2 ways. 1) abandon our conscience completely because it hinders military decisions and could lead to defeat. 2) fidelity to moral law and Christian love.


Ideas taken heavily from Thomas Merton's "Peace in a Post-Christian Era"

Renovare: Week 32 Nov 20-26

Hannah Whitall Smith - "Secret of a Happy Life"

Need to move from "must I?" ( duty ) to "may I" ( love )

How?

Put your will over completely into the hands of your Lord. Trust Him to bring your whole wishes and affections into conformity with His own sweet, and lovable, and most lovely will.

Renovare: Week 31 Nov 13-19

John Woolman - The Journal of John Woolman

Choices he ( and we ) faced in life:
- wealth, greatness and conveniences vs humbly seeking the voice of the Shepherd
- wordly wisdom vs being righteous, full of love and humility
- pursuing profits and friendships vs being acquainted with the way of true peace
- fighting vs self-denial and acquaintance to the cross
- stirrings and commotions vs pure inward prayer
- rely on tradition, excess and reputation vs charity and principle

Renovare: Week 30 Nov 6-12

William Temple - Christianity and Social Order



Temple believes "If Christianity is true at all, it is a truth of universal application." This is a common sentiment among revivalists encouraging their listeners on to more complete devotion and adherence to Christ's teaching in all areas of one's life. Yet he also states to those that would ask for a remedy to society's ails, "I can not tell you the remedy".

Christianity is a universal set of principles but it can not set out the remedy to a social problem. Any suggested remedies would apparently represent too much of an ideal society for his liking, ( and probably his listeners as well ) and as Temple points out; "no one wants to live in the ideal society as depicted by anyone else."

So, "Although Christianity supplies no ideal, it does supply something of far more value, namely, principles on which we can begin to act in every possible situation."

Now if it were those principles which shaped ones life and then subsequently shaped society that would seem like an appropiate conclusion, but according to Temple, "the law, the social order, is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ."

How can this be? If mankind is continually, and selfishly, putting itself in God's place ( Temple's definition of original sin ) how can society as a whole be selfless enough to create laws and social order that would school itself all the way to a saving knowledge of Christ?