No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Over the last couple of days Father Orthoduck and I have been discussing short-term missions, theology, and social justice.  Let me now return to short-term missions with a quote from the article by Tony Campolo that was cited earlier. In this quote, Tony Campolo provides the link between Glenn Beck’s disdain for government and private donations to organizations that serve the poor. And, if his view were to be adopted, it would severely and negatively impact both missions financing and charitable donations.

Altruistic Americans have done to the Haitians what an out-of-control welfare system has done to so many poor people here in the United States. It has made them into people who are socially and psychologically dependent on others to solve their problems and who have lost confidence in their own capabilities.

Catch what Tony Campolo is arguing. This is a very important step because it provides the justification for American Christians to ignore the widow, the orphan, and the poor. In the article he is arguing both cogently, but only partially correctly, that short-term missions organizations squander money that could be better spent if it were donated directly. In the previous post, I have already provided a defense of short-term missions in which I agreed that he was theoretically correct, but only in a perfect world. In an imperfect world and in imperfect Christianity, correctly run short-term missions are a good thing.

But, then, Pastor Campolo goes on to the argument above. Look at the linkage that he makes between USA government programs and “altruistic Americans.” In defense of Pastor Campolo, he is arguing against paternalism, an evil which does need to be guarded against by any missions organization. But, he is arguing against paternalism by building a linkage that is inappropriate, and that I also believe to be historically untrue. But, he makes an even stronger charge:

. . . Yet Haiti has continued in a downward spiral into greater and greater poverty and social disorganization, not in spite of all these “good works,” but in great part because of them.

The situation in Haiti is a sad situation. It is compounded by a long series of corrupt leaders and an inherent classism in which “light-skinned” rich Haitians lord it over the “dark-skinned” poor Haitians. Yet Pastor Campolo says that the social works funded by Christians–read the article–are in “great part” responsible for Haiti’s disorganized and poverty-stricken situation. So, not only are Haitians dependent, but they are only partially responsible for their situation. We Christians bear the “greater part” of the guilt because of our “paternalism.” This is an echo of the classic Marxist charge that religion is the opiate of the people. It is also an even stronger echo of a much older charge from the time of the Roman Empire, when a poet named Juvenal wrote, “Give them bread and circuses and they will never revolt.”

As with the charge against short-term missions, Pastor Campolo is addressing what he sees as a problem. His solution is to give only through organizations of a certain type, but it is a solution that is as idealistic and mistaken as his “solution” to cut-off short-term missions. But, there is a much greater danger in what Pastor Campolo says. The Religious Right has already made an ungodly fetish of prohibiting the government from engaging in any social work. (I only wish that the Religious Right would follow through and legally give up their Social Security and Medicare benefits, for which they are not paying in full but receiving as public welfare. That way both of those programs would achieve financial stability and the Religious Right could self-fund their retirement and medical benefits through the churches, like they claim should be happening.) Could you imagine if this idea from the Religious Left took hold among the Religious Right? Why, having come up with a justification of why they should oppose government “socialism,” they would now have a justification why the churches themselves should not give too much to the poor! After all, it would just be promoting a church form of paternalism that would be preventing the poor from being all they can be.

And, so, Pastor Campolo’s rhetorical linkage by the Religious Left to a Religious Right fetish gives the complete excuse as to why Christians and churches should not donate too much to the poor, except in tragic situations or for special issues such as orphanages, lest they inadvertently damage the poor by being too generous. In passing, even schools are mentioned by Pastor Campolo, so they may be out as well. Think how long this is away from the many many writings in Church history that speak of giving to the poor with open hands. This is why the word heresy is included in my title. Put the ideas of Glenn Beck on churches that speak of social justice together with Tony Campolo’s fear of paternalism, and you have the makings of a perfect storm that could undo many Christian social works, both in this country and in others.

Related posts:

1. Short-term missions, social support, and Tony Campolo
2. Glenn Beck and social and economic justice
3. Glenn Beck did NOT boil a frog

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Recently Glenn Beck said on his radio shows that if their priest or pastor or preacher is using the terms economic or social justice that they should leave their local congregation. To make sure that you do not think that Father Orthoduck is misquoting Glenn Beck, please go here to read his defense on his own website. In fact, Father Orthoduck thinks that there is some interesting stuff in his own defense posting. For instance:

GLENN: No idea. “Mr. Beck said on his radio show March 2nd, I beg you look for the word social justice or economic justice on your church website. If you can find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice are code words.” Quoting me. Am I advising people to leave their church? Yes, if I’m going, if I’m going to Jeremiah Wright’s church, he said, referring to President Obama’s former pastor in Chicago. If you have a priest that is pushing social justice, go find another parish. Notice, notice, leave your parish, not your church.

What Father Orthoduck finds interesting is that Glenn Beck tries to make it appear that he was only talking about extreme congregations of the Jeremiah Wright type. And, at first he appears to have support from the transcript of the prior show. But, unfortunately, he then goes on to justify himself, and it is at this point that Father Orthoduck is unhappy:

GLENN: Yeah. Religion scholars say the term social justice now listen. This is a defense if you know history, this is their defense? Religious scholars say the term social justice was coined in the 1800s, codified by successive popes and adopted widely by protestant churches in the 1900s.

PAT: After the progressive movement had kicked in. Jeez.

GLENN: For the love of Pete. Marx started in 19 1848. All of this stuff started percolating, all of Nietzsche comes along, everything, it’s redistribution of wealth. I’ve told you this, the progressive movement started with people like Woodrow Wilson whose father was a preacher! They perverted Christianity! “The concept is that Christians should not merely give to the poor but also work to correct unjust conditions that keep people poor.” Yes! You’re exactly right. We should as Christians do that. But then there’s that added little step of having the government do it, not you.

Father Orthoduck would hope that there would be many Roman Catholics who would be incredibly insulted that there is a linkage made between their popes and Karl Marx. This would be especially true since the Second Vatican Council directly stated that social justice is part of the duty and responsibility of the Church. In particular, one should look at documents such as Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate. Mr. Beck goes on to try to defend himself by stating that he is only arguing about the use of government to accomplish social justice. But, here is the problem for Mr. Beck. He equates social justice merely with “give-away” programs, which he defines in the worst possible fashion. But, if one looks at the documents issued by both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Church, social justice has a much deeper and stronger meaning than simply “give-away” programs. Our documents consistently link the idea of social justice to the call of the prophets, the apostles, and Holy Tradition for the care of the widow and the orphan, for judges that behave appropriately, for economic transactions that are fair and just (look up both the Book of James and how many times things like unfair weights, etc., are condemned in the OT)., etc.

Father Orthoduck has noticed that the Religious Right in this country is increasingly making wilder and wilder claims. With Glenn Beck this claim now goes far beyond what is appropriate to change Church teaching into something that it is not.

Father Ernesto has been doing some postings on short-term missions to which he will return tomorrow. But, he wishes you to know that, in one area, Tony Campolo has also slipped into this same problem of increasing denial of Church teaching in the area of social justice.

Related posts:

1. Glenn Beck did NOT boil a frog
2. Tony Campolo, Glenn Beck, and heresy
3. On the Orthodox and economic theories

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

I am a supporter of short-term missions. However, my blog post of the day before yesterday did not make that clear. I have seen at least two people called to long-term missions because they served on a short-term mission team. My problem is not with short-term missions per se. My problem is with under-trained teams who come over and cause multiple problems to the missionaries in residence and who expect the local long-term missionary to be overwhelmingly grateful that they have deigned to come. I saw too many of that type of visitor coming through.

Nevertheless, I do not fully agree with people, such as Tony Campolo, who argue:

Does it ever occur to those leaders who take bright, enthusiastic American young people to Haiti to build hundreds and hundreds of church buildings and schools that Haitians are capable of building them? Do they even consider how many jobs they take away from Haitians because of their well-intentioned construction enterprises? Does it occur to them that when Haitians see an American youth group put up a cinder block school building in just ten days that this could contribute to a sense of inferiority as these Americans do in ten days what seems to Haitians like a miracle?

This an argument that, interestingly enough, is made by some conservative and some liberal Christians. The argument is that there is an incredible amount of money that is spent by short-term mission teams, money that could be better spent if it were given directly to the Haitian churches. And, you know what? There really is a lot of truth to that argument. It is a very idealistic viewpoint, and all the more attractive because it is true.  But, as with many idealistic arguments, it is based on people behaving in an idealistic and perfect fashion.

But, in a less than idealistic world, in a world that is full of fallen and damaged people, people do not behave in an idealistic way. In fact, people do not give freely in the way in which they ought to. We can rail away at Christians who will not freely give unless they are personally involved or personally know the people, or we can come up with ways that educate and help recruit world-involved Christians. I prefer going for the honey rather than the vinegar. Short-term missions is a good way to expose Christians with a limited worldview to something bigger, something that can be life-changing for them. And, when they have the life changing experience that turns them into world Christians, they often become personally involved either as missionaries themselves, or as coordinators and supporters of missions.

And, there are a couple of factors that Tony Campolo forgets to take into account. One factor is that there are organizations such as SIFAT that are Christian and provide sustainable technology to needy areas. Their short-term missions activities improve the quality of life of local peoples through sustainable renewable technologies. The other factor is that there are many areas where the local Christians feel isolated and alone. A visit from a properly taught, properly behaving, mission team lets them know that there is more to Christianity than what they experience locally, and lets them know that they are not alone. In other words, in a properly put together short-term mission, both sides can have their worldview enlarged.

But, there is one further argument that Tony Campolo makes that has me seeing red.

===MORE TO COME===

Related posts:

1. Tony Campolo, Glenn Beck, and heresy
2. Learning about whom we visit in short-term mission
3. Glenn Beck and social and economic justice

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Fed. appeals court upholds ‘under God’ in pledge

By TERENCE CHEA
Associated Press Writer

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal appeals court upheld the use of the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance and “In God We Trust” on U.S. currency, rejecting arguments Thursday that the phrases violate the separation of church and state.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected two legal challenges by Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow, who said the references to God are unconstitutional and infringe on his religious beliefs.

The same appeals court caused a national uproar and prompted accusations of judicial activism when it decided in Newdow’s favor in 2002, ruling that the pledge violated the First Amendment prohibition against government endorsement of religion. . . .

Judge Carlos Bea . . . wrote for the majority in Thursday’s 2-1 ruling. “The Pledge of Allegiance serves to unite our vast nation through the proud recitation of some of the ideals upon which our Republic was founded,” he said. . . .

Rory Little, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, agreed. He said the Supreme Court is unlikely to review the case because Thursday’s ruling is the third appellate court decision upholding the pledge.

In addition, Congress passed legislation reaffirming the pledge in 2002, following the 9th Circuit’s ruling that struck it down.

“I think this is the last word on this particular lawsuit,” Little said. “It’s an important ruling.”

In a separate 3-0 ruling Thursday, the appeals court upheld the inscription of the national motto “In God We Trust” on U.S. coins and currency, citing an earlier 9th Circuit panel that ruled the phrase is ceremonial and patriotic and “has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion.”

If you want to read the full article rather than the few excerpts above, go here and do a search for “In God We Trust”.

Needless to say, I am utterly pleased with the court’s ruling. I also like the wording of the ruling in that they have struck a moderate tone of voice that honors history while avoiding the thorny issue of activism in religion, which is precisely what the government is supposed to do. It is a ruling that will not please the extremes in this country, but it is one that is within our common law tradition of interpretation. Unfortunately, there will inevitably be the extreme non-theists who will continue pushing for a secular country in which religion is pushed out of public discourse, despite the freedom of religion clause. On the other side, there will inevitably be the extreme Judeo-Christians who will continue pushing to formally establish Christianity as the religion of the USA despite the establishment clause.

I suspect that most people do not know that, legally, courts have to balance out two separate clauses in the Constitution of the United States of America. One is called the freedom of religion clause, while the other is called the establishment clause. Because both are broadly worded, it is sometimes a difficult balancing act to come up with adequate judicial interpretations. Nevertheless, the establishment clause has been winning all too often in the past thirty years. This ruling is a welcome breath of fresh air pushing back towards the other clause.

Related posts:

1. A small victory for religious expression
2. Of Bible, interpretation, and Supreme Court judges, part 03
3. Of Bible, interpretation, and Supreme Court judges, part 06

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

In January of 2009, I posted a blog on what we can learn from the poor. I talked about Fr. Alejandro Mesco and what he had taught me about sharing the good things that the Lord gives us. Just today, I read an article in Mission Frontiers which is a magazine of the US Center for World Missions. It is found in the column titled Further Reflections and the particular article is called, Learning the Lay of the Land.

The author is reflecting on Haiti and a culture where, “the rule of law is questionable and where only a few people control the flow of the money.” He answers that question with some reflections that do not give a direct answer but cause us to think. Among his reflections are:

“How prepared are the 14-day teams that have gone to Haiti or other places we in the USA consider ‘needy’? Were these teams really helpful? What did they actually do? How prepared were they to understand the situation in the country before they got there?”

He then talks about hearing an interview on a travel channel, of all places, where a question was asked about teams who go to other countries in order to participate in short-term help. The interview was not addressing disaster situations, rather it was addressing a planned short-term situation, such as the physicians who will often go during the summer with a non-profit to do a two-week surgery visit or dental visit, etc. The person being interviewed commented:

Rick first talked about the need for the group to learn about the situation, learning about the history of Latin America and the relationship between rich and poor. . . . He recounted the uneasy historical tensions between the rich and the poor, and the cycle of the rich often oppressing or killing the poor and the poor often revolting and killing the rich. . . . Then Rick Steves added a comment that points to a core issue in mission today. Church people (and he is a church person, he noted) tend not to ask the questions as to why the poverty is there in the first place.

Comments of this type then lead the author of the magazine article to make some very interesting observations:

I couldn’t help thinking about the lingering question: Why are we “church” people often so far behind in our awareness, reflection and action? I know there are many exceptions, but we often seem to be stuck in a sort of “pre-Information Age” in which we bumble around the world with two-week teams ignorant of the histories and cultures of those we serve, and then we’re so relieved to go home, “where people at least pick up the trash.” But what does that kind of mentality communicate to those we visit in other nations?

These short-term trips may impart some blessing to the peoples they purport to serve, but how do these trips really help these peoples deal with their situation? What other problems do we ignore or create while trying to help?

I can remember short-term mission teams coming to “help” us in South America. Sometimes they would be a blessing, but we always shuddered when we received the news that some visitors or a team was coming because us missionaries knew that their expectations and our needs would often be wildly divergent. Interestingly enough, there was one group that we were always glad to receive and it was a secular group. That group was World Challenge from England. What is World Challenge?

World Challenge provides educational expeditions in the developing world and closer to home which teach life skills, stretch comfort zones and expand minds outside the classroom. The bespoke 1 to 6-week itineraries foster team and leadership skills and are the culmination of our pioneering programmes, which see young people involved in planning and fundraising their way to the experience of a lifetime.

The students who travel with them, travel for a mixture of adventure and social service. Each trip requires that the student fully and freely participates in some hands-on work on a social project of some type. But, at the same time, they also do some adventure hiking, etc., so that the whole trip is not simply “work”. The students raise their money during the year, but must also attend seminars in which the history and background of each country that is visited. They must learn important cultural do’s and dont’s. They learn to work as a team, with some team-building exercises during the year. And, most important, they may not go on the trip unless they have completed the entire training.

Thus, by the time we received a team, they were shepherded by experienced adults–who most often were schoolteachers during the year, not full-time employees–,  the students would know how to properly greet and behave among us. And, while the students were every bit as rowdy as First World students often are, they knew how to work as a team and when to cut off the horseplay and get to work. Even in their horseplay, they would never do in public anything that would run counter to the culture. They did their own laundry, asking only where the facilities were, and did not expect us to cook for them unless they had pre-arranged it with us before they even arrived. Again, they would only ask about kitchen facilities or would simply go to a local cheap restaurant.

In the article I cited from the beginning, I mentioned that it documented how I had learned from the poor. This article documents what I learned from the rich. Realistically, the students that I met who traveled with World Challenge were often upper-class since the South America trip was a six-week trip. They taught me about how incredibly helpful a prepared short-term team can be. I took at least one team on the multiple hour mule ride to Choco. I wish I could find a couple of the photographs so you could see a 30 some mule team strung out, hanging over a canyon on a narrow trail, with a student or adult perched on each one. And, when they got there they pitched in and helped in the building of a Mother’s Center, guided by the local Quechua villager. Note: the villagers were in charge of the building and directed, not the other way around. They taught about having the humility to accept the direction of someone who could barely read and write.

So, what about the “Christian” short-term teams or visitors? Frankly, they were the ones who caused us to shudder. . .

Related posts:

1. Short-term missions, social support, and Tony Campolo
2. Tony Campolo, Glenn Beck, and heresy
3. On learning humility

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

From Pithless Thoughts:

Do you fast?
Let the ears by not listening to evil talk and gossip.
For what good is it if we abstain from birds and fishes,
but bite and devour our brothers and sisters? (St. John Chrysostom).

When my wife and I were married less than five years, we were asked to go to Port Huron, Michigan, where there was a small congregation that was also a covenant community. They were affiliated with what was then one of the leading examples of intentional community in the USA, the Word of God Community. We both learned many things from that community and the Word of God Community, but, at the same time, came to realize that we were looking for something that we had not yet found. It was from that community that we became Anglicans and ended up going into mission work.

Among their best teachings were the “practical” teachings on living out the Christian life. And, one of the ones that we use to this day is the teaching on gossip. I will not try to reproduce it other than to say that the cartoon above is a good representation of the teaching received. You see, it is all too easy for Christians to hide a massive temptation to gossip and habit of gossiping by putting on a suitably pious face on the whole thing. As the cartoon shows, we often use a supposed concern for the fate of others as an excuse to share information which the other person has no right to know. We are not gossiping; we are asking for intercessory prayer; we are asking for the intercession of the saints. And, when we sin with our tongues with the other person, we claim that we are simply giving them the information that they need in order to intercede for the person about whom we are concerned.

And so, they gave us several guidelines to determine whether something we were sharing was gossip. Among them were:

• Did the person about whom you are talking give you permission to share their story and ask for prayer?
• Would you be embarrassed to repeat what you said in front of the person about whom you were talking?
• Does the person who is hearing the story have any authority to deal with the issue? They specifically said that you could not use intercessory prayer as an excuse to share. Though intercessory prayer changes things, in the realm of gossip it is all too often (over 90%) of the time an excuse to share inappropriately.
• Is what you are sharing going to diminish the reputation of the person about whom you are sharing?

There were one or two more guidelines, but you get the idea. So, what would I recommend when you hear an item you think you ought to share?

• Share all you want with Our Lord Jesus Christ. Express your concerns to Him in prayer, then leave the matter in His hands. However, be prepared for the idea that He may very well begin to work on YOU and maybe even call you to confession and repentance while leaving the other person alone!
• Share all you want with the saints in glory. They are with the Lord and purified of their sins. Ask them to intercede on behalf of the person about whom you are worried.
• Share cautiously with your priest (pastor). However, be prepared for the idea that if he is a good priest and wise that he may very well begin to work on YOU and maybe even call you to confession and repentance!
• Do not share with anyone else.

As I said, to this day I consider many of their practical teachings to be quite wise.

Related posts:

1. Oh, the games people play
2. Do we love the “other”?
3. How big is your cross?

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

A dragon lives forever but not so little boys
Painted wings and giant rings make way for other toys.
One grey night it happened, Jackie Paper came no more
And Puff that mighty dragon, he ceased his fearless roar.

As I was listening to this Peter, Paul, and Mary song on Sunday, I found myself with tears in my eyes. In part this did not surprise me. I am a proud Latino, that means that my original culture has taught me that I am allowed to be emotional, and my adopted culture (USA) has taught me that it is OK for men to cry. So, between one and the other, I had tears in my eyes. But, why did I have such a strong feeling? Well, I think for any of several reasons:

1. The song was written at a time of high idealism. Whatever one may think of all the mistakes that us babyboomers have made over the decades–and there have been many–the late 1960’s and early 1970’s were a time of high idealism in this country. From that time came movements such as the Jesus People, the modern Christian music movement, etc. I would argue that on the political front there was also a time of high idealism in which there was a hope of a change for the better. We did not notice at that time that people continued divided into “right” and “left” but it certainly was a time of high idealism. I admit it. I miss the idealism and the high hopes that were as common as breathing at that time. Our hope was not in the Lord, and so it was vain, but even as a false hope, it was hope of real change in this world. Yet, for all the mistakes we made, many of us would not be Christians if it were not for the radical Christianity that sprang up at that time.

2.  But, we are now grandparents. I think that part of my tears were the sadness that every parent and grandparent has felt since the time of Adam and Eve. And this is the deeper sadness. We raise our children. We watch our children raise our grandchildren. If we are truly honest, we admit that within us there is the desire that none of our descendants go through what we have gone through. We want our children and grandchildren to remain innocent. Theologically we know that this is not possible, but we are like Adam and Eve, when we have our children, we hope that these are the children who somehow will stay in the innocence of the Garden of Eden. We groan and ache when we watch our children “learn” evil. We realize that the damage to our human nature is present in them also. And, so we watch another generation unable to avoid exactly the same mistakes we made, despite all our warnings and teaching. And so, as grandparents we learn even deeper what it means that Adam and Eve sinned and that we are fallen and damaged.

3.  And, we are also older. That is what it means to be grandparents. That also means that every one of us who is a grandparent–or of that age–has watched a loved one die or has had a close friend die. We have learned the bitterness of sin. All of us are realizing, either in our own bodies or by watching our friends, that the curse of Genesis is still quite active. Sin has yet to meet its final defeat. Hell has been defeated; the door to Paradise is open; but death has yet to be fully defeated; we have yet to be fully redeemed. There still remains for us a hope that has yet to be fulfilled. “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.’”

And so, it is only as we reach old age that we finally begin to truly understand the curse, that we truly begin to understand the loss of innocence that came as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve. It is only now that we begin to fully realize that we, too, have followed Adam and Eve in their decision. But, to our own personal pain, it is only now that we begin to truly realize that we have passed on the curse to those whom we love most and love best, our children and grandchildren.

Yes, we have hope. Yes, we have been redeemed by Our Lord. But, it is only when one is older that one begins to understand why the Orthodox funeral liturgy has, at its beginning, passages that speak of the agony of death and the pain of sin. Yes, the service is filled with the hope of the Lord. But, that hope only makes sense if one fully understands the effect of the curse on Adam and Eve.

A dragon lives forever but not so little boys.

Pippin: I didn’t think it would end this way.
Gandalf: End? No, the journey doesn’t end here. Death is just another path… One that we all must take. The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass… And then you see it.
Pippin: What? Gandalf?… See what?
Gandalf: White shores… and beyond, a far green country under a swift sunrise.
Pippin: [smiling] Well, that isn’t so bad.
Gandalf: [softly] No… No it isn’t.

Related posts:

1. Gandalf, my priest friend, and what awaits
2. USO girls in WWII
3. Hellenists and Converts, oh my, part 02

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

As Father Orthoduck is writing this, he is very tired from a long Sunday of very worthwhile worship and service of the Lord. But, thanks to a fellow blogger, Father Orthoduck was introduced to the blog of a delightfully wacky fellow Orthodox blogger. And, so, Father Orthoduck recommends Steve of Pithless Thoughts. Particularly his current Lenten cartoons take a wonderful and humorous look at the reality and foibles of Lenten fasting and Lenten attitudes.

Father Orthoduck must admit the longer that Lent goes on, the more scrumptious a hot dog looks, and who cares how bad they are for your health!

Related posts:

1. Go to confession during Lent
2. On the development of Great Lent
3. Of mushrooms and Lent

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

What can we learn from the experiences of General MacArthur and Secretary of State Marshall on handling the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan? After all, both history and statistics show that both men were fully successful in turning former enemies into stable and reliable allies. Mind you, this does not mean that they never disagree with us, but, when all is said and done, they stand with us. What did they do that helped turned former military enemies into civilian allies? Well, there were several things that they did that might be helpful to us at this time.

1.  They accepted the existing system of government and did not attempt to change it. Before World War II, Japan was a constitutional empire and Germany was a parliamentary democracy. After World War II, Japan remained a constitutional empire and Germany remained a parliamentary democracy. Neither man was interested in changing the style of government that each culture had developed over the course of time. They were only interested in ensuring that the governments were just governments in which people behaved ethically and the police forces were just. They were not interested in turning either country into an American-style representative democracy. After all, if a government is just, its particular form does not matter, and, if a government is unjust, its particular form does not matter. If one is a victorious invader, it is actually easier to maintain stability in a country if one maintains as many cultural forms as possible, provided those forms do not conflict with your ethical and security goals. One can see this in Cyrus’ treatment of the Jews in the Books of Nehemiah and Ezrah.

2.  Both men spent unstintingly in the rebuilding of the shattered economies. The rebuilding of infrastructure was actually a higher priority than the pursuit of former enemies. And, in order to rebuild and maintain the infrastructure, both men used the experienced professionals of the former regime since both Axis powers forced all middle and upper level managers to be part of the party. There is nothing that so settles a populace as having fairly full employment and a working infrastructure. If one has a full belly and a warm house, one is much less likely to rebel than if one is hungry and searching for a non-existent job. Again, look at the Books of Nehemia and Ezrah and see how much money both of those men were given in order to rebuild shattered Israel.

3.  The United States of America had a policy that allowed the immigration of many of the displaced persons from both Japan and Europe. This immigration policy not only functioned as a relief valve while the infrastructure was being rebuilt, but also built links between the USA and the former Axis countries. These were ties that went much deeper than treaties or governmental theories. Many Japanese, Germans and Austrians ended up with relatives here; relatives who reported that they had jobs and were well accepted by the populace. If you have ever seen the movie The Sound of Music, with Julie Andrews, you know that it is based on a real family who was really called the von Trapp family, and who really had to flee Austria. But, the film ends with them climbing over the mountains to the safety of Switzerland. Father Orthoduck is certain that most of you do not know that the von Trapp family ended up in Vermont. If you are interested in the story of the von Trapp family, you can go to The National Archives and see photographs as well as copies of their USA documents.

4.  The United States of America had post-war tours by people from the defeated Axis powers. One can read in newspapers from the late 1940’s and early 1950’s of touring Japanese karate experts (and teams), Austrian singers, German engineers, etc. That is, by having those people tour through the USA, it helped us see them as just normal human beings, rather than as monsters who were only fit to be killed.

Can you see how the application of policies of this type might help in turning former enemies into allies? Father Orthoduck would suggest that we need to study both General MacArthur and Secretary of State Marshall to see how many of their successful policies can be applied wholesale to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Related posts:

1. Some unpolished thoughts on the Middle East
2. Hearing ourselves through the ears of others
3. So, the solution is to dump middle-class retired folk?

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.