ancient promises and modern heresy
My church history professor warned us to be cautious of history textbooks, for the victors get to write the “official” version. To understand the whole story, she pushed; we would do well to read from the margins. She invited us to dig in the trenches and climb the poles of heresy for a better view of the world.
Life lived in the margins, however, can itself obstruct the view. My own poles of heresy at the moment keep me stretched between adolescent drama and the Obama-Clinton show down. Admittedly, I almost missed the historic birthday celebrations in Jerusalem last week.
In a world where friends are few, President Bush attended the celebration and assured the Knesset that the United States is Israel’s “best friend”. Given that both governments have outdone themselves in their abilities to create enemies, I suppose the “bff” designation is at least practical. As we encourage each other in the building of bigger walls, skilled weaponry, and the embrace of coercive interrogation, it may be true that we deserve each other. The ‘best friend’ language, however, is a guile intimation of childlike innocence.
Ridiculous becomes dangerous when we paint God’s name on our blessing. In reference to the founding of the nation state of Israel, President Bush said that it was, “more than the establishment of a new country. It was the redemption of an ancient promise given to Abraham and Moses and David — a homeland for the chosen people Eretz Yisrael.”
To be sure, Abraham’s children told their children that God promised the land on which they stood to them in much the same way that the children of the Mayflower Pilgrims told theirs. Handily Bush invoked this echo as he quoted from William Bradford, “Come let us declare in Zion the word of God.”
I have no doubt that Abraham, Bradford, and Bush claim God’s sanction on their land grabs. My concern is when we confuse their claim with God’s. Frankly, I am more likely to be moved by Ishmael’s hearing of God, or even Isaac’s than Abraham’s. Those who have been tied to the altar are much more likely to be listening for God’s compassion than those accustomed to wielding the sword.
Manifest destiny appears to be a gift from God if read from the perspective of the European settlers. The Native American version of that same chapter, however, gives God no credit for the Trail of Tears or Wounded Knee. This should serve as a cautionary note when we are tempted to put God’s name on our deeds.
In the face of the unrelenting genocides of the past century, I am loathe to cast stones towards any particular peoples struggling to defend a homeland. When it comes to Jerusalem, there are legitimate and competing claims. In the least, we whose European ancestors used God’s name to take Native American lands ought to leave God’s name off our rhetoric.
And who knows? Maybe refraining from putting God’s name on our claims might help as we manage the heresies closer to home.
To paraphrase Lincoln, in most conflicts both sides believe that God is on their side and at least one side must be wrong.
May 24th, 2008 at 2:04 pmThat Lincoln was a smart guy!
May 24th, 2008 at 5:35 pm