Archivepeace

German Federal Armed Forces are stationed in the Alsace!

The announcement shortly before Christmas 2010 got lost in the whirlpool of events. For the first time, a unit of the German Federal Armed Forces has been stationed in the French Alsace. The 600 soldiers belonging to the 291^st Infantry Batallion (Jägerbataillon) are sharing barracks with the 2^nd French Armored Brigade.

Imagine the long path that Germany and France have taken since World War I and World War II! How good it is when politicians and societies desire peace and solidarity and not war and supremacy. Christians should thank God that he has heard their prayer for peace-loving rulers and pray that war never breaks out in Western Europe again.

Source: http://derstandard.at/1291454831863/Bundeswehr-im-Elsass

Terry Jones, please read your Bible and do not place yourself in God’s position!

A comment by Thomas Schirrmacher, Chairman of the Theological Commission of the World Evangelical Alliance

This blog entry is a supplement to the following German communication in Bonner Querschnitte, translated her from the German:

The World Evangelical Alliance condemns the Murder of UN Workers

But not before Jones had dragged Jesus’ name through the mud

(Bonn, April 1, 2011) The World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) has condemned in the strongest possible terms both the burning of the Koran by a miniscule splinter group in the USA as well as the murder of UN workers in Afghanistan. As the General Secretary of the WEA, the Canadian Geoff Tunnicliffe communicated in a statement, a detestable act which has nothing to do with the Christian faith could never be used to justify an even more detestable act. Tunnicliffe expressed his deepest condolences to the family members of the UN workers and called upon Muslim leaders around the world to calm those prepared to commit acts of violence and to make it clear that the burning of the Koran had been condemned by all Christian churches.

The Chairman of the Theological Commission of the World Evangelical Alliance, Thomas Schirrmacher, declared that the burning of the Koran is an act that occurred against the clear will of Jesus, who prohibited his disciples from using the sword against others as well as calling down fire from heaven. With their act, the congregation in Gainesville, in the presence of Terry Jones, sullied the name of Jesus Christ before the entire world. Terry Jones pointed to the fact that the WEA had repeatedly expressed massive opposition to the Koran burning and in the USA had closed ranks with Muslim leaders on this issue.

Schirrmacher also pointed out that the WEA had warned Jones and others repeatedly that the price for the madness was not to be paid by Jones and others in the safety of America but rather by innocent people around the world. Precisely that has now happened, as little as the burning of a book could justify the murder of people.

The fact that in the attack Hindus and non-religious people were murdered shows, according to Schirrmacher, that Islamism is not only directed against Christianity, but rather that it is a mobilizing agent against all of those who think differently. Peace loving people of all religions and world views have to corporately direct themselves against such a thing. Religious freedom, peace, and justice are indivisible.

German Source: www.bucer.eu

While Jesus prophesied to his followers: “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. . . . Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God“ (Matthew 5:5,9), and while the Apostle Paul summons us as follows: “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Romans 12:18), Jones decided that playing with fire is the order of the day. In the first place this was literal. It used social networks on the Internet for an international trial against the Koran and then brought a subsequent conviction and burning of a copy of the Koran.

Even if it is the case that everyone is in danger of not living up to the Gospel, there is something special that applies here that God has said: “’God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you‘“ (Romans 2:24). In any event, up to now Terry Jones has made neither the God of love nor Jesus known around the world. He has only made himself known.

Terry Jones is trying to win capital for the faith out of the political mood against Islam. Still: “’ . . . all who draw the sword will die by the sword’” (Matthew 26:52). Over against that is the following: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness . . .” (Galatians 5:22-23). Our mandate is thus another one: “Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone“ (Titus 3:1-2).

Terry Jones intertwines the mandate of the church and the mandate of the state over against Islam to a degree that is beyond all recognition. In the end he pledges neither to the church nor to the state, but rather as an individual takes things into his own hands in the place of the supposed too friendly church and the too lax state. The Islamic idea that the individual may exercise violence and force through Islam if the state and society should do it but do not, making every state monopoly with respect to law and the use of force impossible, has found its parallel in pseudo-Christian garb.

It is naturally wrong that Muslims react to such provocation with violence. However, in spite of this, anyone who so excessively provokes in a manner that knowingly fuels violence and in the process utilizes the language of war is at least in part responsible for the violence that results. For that reason, the World Evangelical Alliance rightly notified Jones of future visits of widows of Christians if there husbands would be could by Islamist violence in reaction to Jones’ deeds.

Christians are glad that God himself is the judge and has retained for himself each and every final judgment. Only God himself can look into the hearts of people, and in the end we cannot see his verdict, since “the Lord does not look at the things people look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart“ (1 Samuel 16:7).

God has forbidden us from enforcing any sort of punitive sentence on our critics and punishing people for their ‘unbelief.’ Even Jonah had to experience that God was more merciful than Jonah himself, for Jonah would have rather seen judgment come upon Nineveh (Jonah 4:4:1-10). And Jesus clearly rebuked the thought of his disciples to send down fire from heaven upon any villages that rejected him (Luke 9:51-56). Christian preachers may regret with a bleeding heart that people reject the offer of salvation in Christ, but they never have the right to declare such people to be monsters, to attack them, to incite the state against them, or to entreat judgment against them or carry it out oneself.

According to the biblical understanding, the monopoly on force in this world is a matter held only by the state, which has neither the mandate to proclaim the Gospel nor to increase the size of the Christian church. Indeed it has to stay out of questions of conscience and religion. It is for this reason, conversely, that the state, as ‘God’s servant, expressly has to punish Christians who do evil (Romans 13:1-7). The state has to protect Christians only insofar as they protect everyone who does good, and the state in its efforts to promote justice and peace has to hinder anyone who plans violence or exercises violence, whether they are religiously motivated or not.

Would Jesus probably have burned a Koran? Would Paul have spoken out in favor of it? Indeed Paul was also “distressed” about the many idols in Athens (Acts 17:16), but he then spoke in a friendly manner and with respect for the Greek philosophers (Acts 17:22-23). This is due to the fact that Christians always ‘defend’ their faith “with gentleness and respect“ over against critics (1 Peter 3:15-16).

The German Armed Forces are Calling again …

Recently I had the honor to speak at a “Security Policy Think Tank Roundtable” regarding the “Implementation of Ethical Training and Advanced Education,” which took place in the German Army Academy for Information and Communication in Strausberg in the state of Brandenburg. In the notice regarding the Roundtable the following was stated: “The Evangelical ethicist Thomas Schirrmacher, who lives in Bonn, has called on ethicists and social ethicists to support and accompany the German Army (Bundeswehr) in its efforts to conduct ethical training. A good tradition of the Federal Republic of Germany is that the parliamentary army is in constant dialog with civil society, and one in which Christian as well as non-Christian ethicists belong.”

I have the opportunity to continue this dialog (my presentation can be found here) before international guests on June 3, 2009 (2:30 – 4:00 pm) in the former BT Chamber, Room C in Bonn at the Deutsche Welle’s Second Global Media Forum (www.dw-gmf.de). The topic is: “The Mutual Responsibility of the Armed Forces and Civil Society.”

Upon this occasion I would like to quote from the Strausberg Report (available in complete form here):

The German Army requires Ethicists!
Protestant Ethicists call upon colleagues to support the German Army in its concept of ‘internal leadership’

(Bonn April 24, 2009) The ethicist Thomas Schirrmacher, resident in Bonn, has called upon ethicists and social ethicists to heighten their support of efforts made by the German Army with respect to ethical training. A good tradition of the Federal Republic of Germany is that the parliamentary army is in constant dialog with the civil society, and one in which Christian as well as non-Christian ethicists belong.

Schirrmacher spoke in the framework of a “Security Policy Think Tank Roundtable” on the “Implementation of ethical Training and Advanced Education,” which took place in the German Army Academy for Information and Communication in Strausberg in the state of Brandenburg.

Schirrmacher accused many of his colleagues of occupying themselves too little with ethical questions within the army and for an army in action. It is naturally correct to occupy oneself generally with ethics in peacetime. However, it is in the everyday activities of the Germany army in its foreign deployments that it is decided how much our democracy differentiates itself from countries which simply utilize the military to accomplish its political goals.

A democratic parliamentary army begins with one of the largest ethical dilemmas that there is, one with which many do not want to get their hands dirty. This applies equally to theologians as well as to politicians. The protection of life and the prohibition against killing is one of the highest values that is known in our constitution and which (almost) all citizens share instinctively. Since there are, however, people on earth – countries as well as armies for civil war and terrorists who are ready to kill or already do kill, someone has to be prepared to potentially risk his or her life or if necessary to even end the life of the attacker. Without this dilemma we would not need an army, and an army would only be employed at that point where a threat to life is real – otherwise, for instance, the Red Cross would be sufficient in Afghanistan.

The monopoly on force which is in the hands of the state, according to Schirrmacher, only allows the state to rightfully maintain an army. There have admittedly been many war mongering armies in history which were contemptuous of human life. A rightfully maintained army can only be differentiated from a war mongering army if political and internal military orientation and structures ensure human rights protection and the goal of freedom.

According to Schirrmacher’s opinion, ethicists – Christians as well as others – may not be allowed to leave the German army out in the cold, and neither may politicians, who disguise highly dangerous operations as peace missions or humanitarian operations and do so in order to present before the public the appearance of not being a participant in a war.

In theory the German Army, with its concept of ‘internal leadership,’ has again confirmed through its Central Service Regulations 10/01 that globally it has the best prerequisites. Now it is left for these ambitious goals to be thought through, communicated, and put into practice.

As a representative of the military, Dr. Edwin Micewski of the Austrian Federal Army also spoke in addition to Schirrmacher at the Security Policy Think Tank Roundtable. Micewski teaches ethics at the Austrian Military Academy as well as at universities in the USA. Although in contrast to Schirrmacher he does not refer back to Christian ethics, but rather a deontology reminiscent of the Kantian tradition, he came to the same result relative to the initial dilemma that an army faces. He also calls for not putting a positive spin on this problem, but rather to pay particular attention to offering support to soldiers and officers in overcoming these problems.

Additional information:

• >Bonner Querschnitte 12/2009 – Issue 96 (in German)
• Photo download: Prof. Schirrmacher and Dr. Micewski at the German Army Military Academy in Strausberg