The stew bubbling in a Ukrainian cauldron provides an occasion to reflect on how, in a more Christianised world, a nation state ought to act toward other states. We do not claim that the issues are always easy. They are certainly not as far as the Ukraine is concerned. Here are some thoughts.
Firstly, nationalism (which elevates one's nation or people group into ultimate reverence) is a great evil and a false god. All that stuff about love of country and hymns of praise to one's patria, is either dangerously borderline or overtly anti-Christian. If Christians would baulk at singing hymns of praise to the nation's president or monarch or head of state then they ought also baulk at singing stirring hymns of pride and love to "Oh my country . . . " Nations quickly become idols.
It is a striking thing that Christians are called in Scripture to love God, to love the brethren and the Church, and to love all men--but never called to love one's country.
When examples arose of God's people veering towards nationalism--the kind of sentiment which not only elevated Israel or Judah to an object of inordinate loyalty, but which also looked down upon other nations with arrogance--divine rebuke swiftly followed. Such was regnant in Jonah's heart, and God dealt with him drastically.
The closest you can come to it is in passages like the lament over Zion in Psalm 137 by the exiles in Babylon. But this was a lament over God's judgement upon Judah, His lapsed worship, and for His Kingdom, not over Judea per se--as is evidenced by the majority of exiles remaining in Babylon, even when there was opportunity to return. It is striking that return to Judah, when it became a possibility, was voluntary. It was never commanded. Rather God told the exiles to settle down in Babylon and bless the city by their lives and contribution. Consequently, only an exile remnant returned home.
Now, of course, national anthems are not intrinsically idolatrous. It all depends what is declared in the anthem of praise. We believe, for example, that the New Zealand national anthem has it about right:
God of nations, at Thy feetNot a scrap of "Hail to the Chief" there. (Incidentally, the secularists hate our national anthem, but to date they have not managed to toss it into the scrap bin of secularist history.)
In the bonds of love we meet
Hear our voices, we entreat
God defend New Zealand . . .
Secondly, nationalism has been a provocation for many wars. It has been a particularly bloody idol, a veritable Molech, consuming its own children. It is not clear just how much nationalism is inflaming both Russia and the Ukraine at this time, but we hazard a guess that it is having an active influence right down into the bowels of both countries.
Thirdly, internationalism has been a provocation to many more wars still. Secular humanism spawned the era of nineteenth and twentieth century nationalism and its outworking was bloody. But its stepchildren were more bloody still. Rationalistic ideologies, grounded in abstractions such as National Socialism or Communism, waged borderless wars. They were genuinely international in focus and reach. Opponents to these ideological abstractions were ruthlessly crushed both inside and outside national borders. Witness Stalin's assassination of Trotsky.
A counter to these tyrannies has been the rise of international law, where effectively nations cede sovereignty and accept the powers, rules, regulations, and taxes of the United Nations. But the counter has proved ineffectual and vain. It has no final sanction because it has not been granted the sword--for which we are very thankful. Were it to have been so granted, our liberty would have shrivelled up more quickly than a wilting rose in the Gobi desert.
One upshot before us now is the frustration of the West at its impotence in the face of Russian aggression and violations of international laws and treaties. Going to war is not an option (thankfully). Any such war would be as illegal and wrong as Russia's belligerence in our view: two wrongs do not make a right. But frustration levels will run very high in the West, particularly in the United States, because impotence does not become that nation's self-image.
Herein is a paradox. It ought not frustrate us at all. The whole concept of human freedom and dignity trades off doctrines of limited government. Thus far the right wing in the US will cheer. But limited governments necessarily must be limited not only in what they are forbidden to do with respect to their own citizens, but to other nations as well. When the conservatives in the US rail against the impotence of their country to do anything in the Crimea or the Ukraine they are guilty of both wanting the cake and of eating it too. It does not withstand scrutiny.
God has given the power of the sword to the civil government. But that power has been granted to defend its innocent citizens against evil doers. It has not been granted to defend citizens of other countries, no matter how beleaguered or severe their plight. We believe a Christian state should be an armed fortress--but armed only for the defence of its own citizens against aggressors. A necessary corollary is a nettle we must willingly grasp: a Christian state will not go to the defence of citizens of another state. A Christian state ought not to enter mutual defence treaties, even with other Christian states.
The bottom line is this: a state and a people unwilling to pay the price to maintain their own defence--like New Zealand, incidentally--deserves its fate. A Christian state has no God-given authority to make war on another state for the defence of citizens not their own.
No comments:
Post a Comment