I posted this question on my facebook update, and the following (I think interesting) discussion ensued. I have reproduced it here. It could be that the New Calvinists - who I take it as representing a theological position as very close to my own - have said a great deal about torture, but I haven't read it. I choose them to pick on as a form of self-criticism.
Nat Smith at 23:57 on 17 May
because they have better things to care about; like people going to hell.
Michael Jensen at 04:18 on 18 May
On the contrary: Piper has a lot to say about abortion for example. It just seems to be a selective choice of political issues to care about.
Jim Wackett at 08:37 on 18 May
Selective indeed. It'd be good to see an application of a 'reformed' world view on those parts of life that exist between the possibility of abortion and euthanasia, and not just limited to same-sex marriage.
Nat Smith at 08:50 on 18 May
waterboarding is flogging a dead horse, abortion, sam-sex marriage and euthanasia are more relevant in obama's america. i guess for piper the priority might go like this; saving innocent lives from death > saving guilty lives from pain.
Jim Wackett at 09:24 on 18 May
Actually, I think Piper would hold that there is no such thing as an innocent life.
David Starling at 09:26 on 18 May
They do - e.g. here:http://theologica.blogspot.com/2009/04/defining-and-condemning-torture-what-it.html
Michael Jensen at 10:43 on 18 May
hmm, alas the links to the Mohler and Neuhaus papers is broken. Never mind. But I am glad to see it. Nat - I am staggered that you would come up with such an awful equation and attribute it to Piper. After all, he knows that Jesus died for the guilty... how we treat the guilty is litmus test of our own understanding of the gospel, isn't it?
Michael Jensen at 10:44 on 18 May
Still, the NC's are far more vociferous in defence of their trad 'family values' issues than they are on this, and that's a bit disappointing. It suggests that American nationalism dies very hard... no?
Roger Fitzhardinge at 11:01 on 18 May
@nat: interesting description of waterboarding ;)
David Starling at 11:07 on 18 May
Two quick thoughts: 1. I think it is entirely legitimate for an individual (e.g. Piper) to pick one or two big social/ethical issues and focus his campaigning on those, rather than issuing a thousand forgettable pronouncements on a thousand different issues. 2. I think it's a bit lazy to respond to Nat's point by playing the 'no such thing as an... innocent person' card. Before God, we're all guilty, of course (and even unborn children are part of a fallen race) but that doesn't mean that the categories of 'innocent' and 'guilty' are irrelevant in interpersonal ethics and public justice. [btw, this is not an argument for the legitimacy of torture, or, for that matter, for the assumption that all Guantanamo detainees were 'guilty' - just an argument against misusing theological categories]
Michael Jensen at 11:15 on 18 May
Well maybe. But I don't think torture IS a forgettable issue. Like abortion, it is an issue that strikes at the very soul of a society.How powerful would their criticism of the former Bush govt be if they preached against this woeful hypocrisy and the endorsement of evil by bureaucratic means! The laziness was Nat's in the first instance (no ... offence, Nat!). One shouldn't have to choose this over that. Neither should preaching the gospel of grace be sectioned off from the prophetic witnes to the egregious crimes of a rather smug society... no?
Jim Wackett at 11:25 on 18 May
David...1. Agreed. But the focus on particular issues can be understood and pursued with a little more integrity if they are placed within a broader context of a commitment to 'life' from cradle to grave. So yes, there should be NC types speaking out on abortion, euthanasia and same-sex marriage. There should also be NC types speaking out on ... poverty, human trafficking, torture etc. 2. Not lazy... just time-starved! ; ) I only sought to make a single, and relevant, point, not articluate an entire response. I don't believe I misued a theological catagory, just addressed that fact that what was being articulated as 'piper's priority' didn't seem to me to hold with his writing/preaching.
David Starling at 11:27 on 18 May
I didn't say that torture was a forgettable issue. What I said was that a thousand statements on a thousand different issues (all of which could, in themselves, be issues of enormous importance) all end up being forgettable statements. And I'm not sure that accusing Nat of "the laziness" (even if the accusation sticks) absolves the rest of us in the thread of the possibility of being guilty of the same crime!
Michael Jensen at 11:37 on 18 May
Yes, thousands statements yes yes. But it is interesting, and sad, that the issues of choice for the NCs are traditional 'right' issues - so therefore easy to dismiss as so much predictible white noise. I am also concerned by the militarism of some of things I hear and read... it'd be nice to hear a counterpoint to that.
David Starling at 11:40 on 18 May
Thanks Jim for the responses. On point 1: I agree that it's a good thing for NC types to be speaking out on poverty, human trafficking, torture, etc. Of course! It happens (eg. this post on Joe Carter's blog the other day:http://evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/author/lindsay-marshall) and maybe it should happen more. But I do think it's also fair to say that on the abortion issue there are very few voices in the public square, apart from conservative Catholics and evangelicals, who are speaking up for unborn children. And as Nat said in his second comment (with the unfortunate mixed metaphor) it's a bit late to be prophetic on the torture issue in Obama's America, but there's still plenty of opportunity to be prophetic on abortion.... On point 2: fair enough - time starved is not the same as lazy! But I still do see plenty of not-so-time-starved people making the sorts of arguments (e.g. the 'no such thing as an innocent person' argument used to flatten moral distinctions
David Starling at 11:58 on 18 May
Thanks Mike for the comeback, too! I agree that in some cases the clarity and gravity of the anti-abortion case can be almost completely obscured by a whole lot of predictable RW white noise. It's one thing to be a principled social conservative - it's another to be a captive to the GOP and the machinations of a Karl Rove.Mind you, the abortion issue can just as easily get lost in a forest of more politically fashionable LW concerns in the discourse of the Campolo/Wallis types as well.... Piper's case, I'm not sure he can be quite so easily pigeon-holed and dismissed as predictably right wing. (e.g. he's been prepared over the years to lose friends within the conservative evangelical constituency on issues like race and gun laws, and I don't remember him being a flag-waver for the 'War on Terror' or the invasion of Iraq).
Michael Jensen at 11:58 on 18 May
The reason it is a bit late to be prophetic on torture is that the government - at the highest level - has been telling porky pies!!! Torture is ALWAYS like this - especially in democracies. It is a secret evil. So when IS the right time to speak out on it?
David Starling at 12:15 on 18 May
Sorry - I think our comments crossed...So this really is the last comment from me. I agree that it's never the wrong time to speak out on torture. All I was saying was that it's no longer 'prophetic' to speak out on that issue. Thankfully, the torture issue is one on which we now have the luxury of swimming with the tide of (majority) public opinion and holding the Obama administration to account for the transparency and consistency with which they follow through on their pre-election rhetoric. That's not necessarily an easy task, bit I'm not sure it's 'prophetic' (in the popular sense of the word).... Unless I'm missing something?
Michael Jensen at 12:48 on 18 May
Well, I dunno about public opinion. You can see that Cheney's arguments are persuasive with a lot of people: the requirement for national security trumps over even the most basic sort of respect for human dignity...the ends is still justifying the means.The thing is - we shouldn't imagine that this is an end to torture. We have known about the use and practice of torture for many years - and that democracies, despite their self-congratulatory rhetoric, continue to practice it anyway.
19 comments:
Thanks for the conversation!
While I can't speak with respect to schools of theologians, could the problem partly be that since torture primarily arises in the Western public consciousness at times of acute societal strain (e.g. late 4'th Republic France; the U.S. over the past few years), responses to its proposal or implementation tend to appear ad hoc and abstruse to relevant decision-makers?
It also seems some acquaintance with the casuistic arts could potentially help in dealing with some arguments of such ilk by Torture's proponents.
Thanks for reposting the discussion. I'm thinking over the issue of torture for a presentation to the Yr-13 program next week.
But it is interesting, and sad, that the issues of choice for the NCs are traditional 'right' issues - so therefore easy to dismiss as so much predictible white noise.agreed. there are human rights and justice issues the left take aim at, while it seems the majority of the Christian right stick to the family values tag.
Makes it very hard for me to choose come election time
shamefully, this survey shows that evangelical Christians are much more likely to support the use of torture:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/04/30/religion.torture/#cnnSTCText
Speaking as a sympathetic outsider (Puseyite) to the 'evangelical' scene, I wouldn't be too disheartened by that survey were I in your position. I suspect those figures are to some extent contingent on transient exigencies of who occupies political power when particular atrocities get singed on the public conscience.
To anecdotally illustrate the political contingency of public sentiment concerning torture, one might recall the line from 1984 where O'Brien says words to the effect that our future is that of a boot stamping on a human face - forever! Granted, Orwell remained a man of the left; nonetheless, the spectre of 1984 has instrumentally been invoked by people of various persuasions.
N.B. I suspect somewhat similar considerations to those raised above by various people concerning torture may also apply concerning draconian and arbitrary punishments.
Of course both to procure an abortion and to torture another human being are forbidden to Christians. And to all people.
How on earth did pro-Abortion become 'left' and pro-torture 'right'?
Is there anything other than fashion that puts these practices in these camps, do you think?
Michael, did you think this is the same (or similar) issue that you talked about today on Sydney Anglicans re. CESA and apartheid?
Yes, pretty much. I am trying to expose the political quietism that is in both places... and I suspect here, too.
If anything, administrative/judicial torture seems a worse contravention of liberal mores than apartheid (which appears more akin to an extreme application of Westphalian sovereignty.)
Hi Michael, having a look around your blog and noticed this discussion. I really appreciate you raising this - and I think your "self-criticism" remark is useful.
We just finished producing (up in Brisbane) a DVD-based curriculum on justice/mercy issues aimed at helping people just like myself work through such things from a gospel perspective:
http://www.citygospel.net/
Interestingly, we've found (this is also self-criticism) that being "gospel-centred" or whatever doesn't always mean one has given much/any thought to "justice" beyond atonement theories.
One specific comment I have on this thread though, it that Piper is probably not the best example - he seems to have really lived out a great deal of "social justice". There are many fitting the NC label who seem silent on justice/mercy issues entirely. I recently heard a sermon on Isaiah Chapter 1 that somehow concluded it was a proclamation of "faith not works" - LOL!
Obama has the most Catholic administration in USA history. Vatican Osservatore Romano editor Vian said on may 18th that Obama "in not a pro-abortion president." What does this prove? That the Vatican message on abortion has only been for politcal purposes. It was used to divide, to encourage Catholics to breed and to encourage non-Catholics to abort out of spite. THe Vatican likes the abortion status quo in the USA for this reason. THeir purpose is only conquest, not faith. Carolignian Brzezinski spawned Zia al Haq, Khomeini, and bin Laden - breaks up superpowers via Aztlan and Kosovo as per Joel Garreau's Nine Nations. Brzezinski, Buckley and Buchanan winked anti-Semitic votes for Obama, delivered USA to Pope's feudal basket of Bamana Republics. Michael Pfleger and Joe Biden prove Obama is the Pope's boy. Obama is half a Kearney from County Offaly in Ireland. Talal got Pontifical medal as Fatima mandates Catholic-Muslim union against Jews (Francis Johnson, Great Sign, 1979, p. 126), Catholic Roger Taney wrote Dred Scott decision. John Wilkes Booth, Tammany Hall and Joe McCarthy were Catholics. Now Catholic majority Supreme Court. Catholics Palmisano, Grasso, Damato, Langone, Dioguardi, Palmieri destroyed American industry. Subprime construction mobsters had hookers deliver mortgages to banks. McCain's Keeting started it all. They find American cars too advanced to use or their mechanics to fix. Their slovenly, anti-intellectual work ethic produces vacuous, casuistrous blather and a tangle of contradictory regulations. NYC top drop outs: Hispanic 32%, Black 25%, Italian 20%. NYC top illegals: Ecuadorean, Italian, Polish. Ate glis-glis but blamed plague on others, now lettuce coli. Their bigotry most encouraged terror yet they reap most security funds. Rabbi circumcises lower, Pope upper brain. Tort explosion by glib casuistry. Hollywood Joe Kennedy had Bing Crosby proselytise. Bazelya 1992 case proves PLO-IRA-KLA links.
セレブ達は一般の人達とは接する機会もなく、その出会う唯一の場所が「逆援助倶楽部」です。 男性はお金、女性はSEXを要求する場合が多いようです。これは女性に圧倒的な財力があるから成り立つことの出来る関係ではないでしょうか？
急に時間が出来ても友達はみんなカレシと一緒でかまってくれません…アタシと遊んでくれる人メール下さい☆ a.a-mai@docomo.ne.jp
会員制の逆援交際倶楽部では男性は無料、一日最低額10万円保障での交際をお求めできます。ご登録された女性様達はセレブであるがための悩みをそれぞれの方が持ち、皆様、男性との営みを求め、ご登録されております。彼女たちとの初々しい一時をお楽しみ、謝礼をいただいてくださいませ。会員制ですので人数に限りがあるため、打ち切りの場合はご了承ください
凄く困ってます☆ love-cac@docomo.ne.jp すぐに連絡ください
マダムと甘い時間を過ごしてみませんか？性欲を持て余しているセレブたちは出張ホストサービスで男性を探し、セックスを求めているのです。ホスト希望の方なら容姿や年齢は一切不問！ご近所の女性を探して、多額の報酬をゲットしよう
Post a Comment