It is a noteworthy fact that torture is at the heart of the Christian story. And it centers on issues of sovereignty. By refusing to renounce his claim of kingship, an act of both blasphemy and treason, Jesus of Nazareth was tortured and executed by the religious and political powers. Further, the followers of Jesus willingly submit to torture and execution to live and die by their claim that their ultimate allegiance is not to any earthly king, prince, kingdom or nation.
My interest in Kahn's analysis in Sacred Violence rests on his notion that torture exists in the space of sovereignty. As noted in Part 1, liberals contest this location, claiming that torture is illegal, that its proper location is in the space of law. Since liberals and conservatives cannot agree upon the location of torture the political discussions are stymied. The fundamental assumptions are disjointed.
But what struck me about Kahn's analysis is that where the politicians and pundits might be stymied the thoughtful Christian has some wiggle room. Specifically, a part of the problem with the political debates about torture (e.g., Cheney vs. Obama) is that each party claims the same sovereign. Both have given their highest allegiance to the United States of America.
If Kahn is correct that torture is best located in the space of sovereignty it strikes me that Christians don't have to argue in the categories deployed by liberals and conservatives. That is, the categories of the Enlightenment need not apply to Christian discourse. Liberals and conservatives may disagree on the location of torture but they don't disagree about their sovereign allegiances. This makes the conversation difficult for them. Christians, by contrast, can sidestep this entire debate. That is, for the Christian the location of torture is largely irrelevant because the Christian doesn't hold the Untied States to be the ultimate sovereign. Jesus was tortured about just this issue: A refusal to recognize Caesar as king. (If he had done so with Pilate he would have gone free. John 18-19.)
The point, for me at least, is that I don't think liberal Christians are best served by arguing that torture is illegal (although it may well be). Further, I don't think that liberal Christians are best served by arguing that torture is immoral. At least if that argument is governed by Enlightenment warrants for morality. Because I think Kahn is correct: Those arguments tend to lead to an impasse. I think the Christian response to torture is best argued by an appeal to allegiances.
And, surprisingly, this analysis reveals something of the power of the Christian worldview. That is, I don't think atheists like Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris can contribute much to the torture debates beyond what is currently being said. Enlightenment categories are a bit impotent here. Just watch TV. But the Christian appeal to the cross breaks the debate open in a fresh and novel way.
In short, the debate about torture is fundamentally, if Kahn is to be believed, a religious debate. It's not a legal or moral debate.
I entitled these posts Torture & Allegiance because I think Kahn is correct, torture exists in the space of sovereignty. Thus, arguments about illegality or morality tend to get stuck when people share the same allegiances. But Christians don't share those same allegiances. So the conversation is more fluid for them. Christians are playing a different game than the one the pundits are playing. That is, I don't think Christians should side with Limbaugh or Olbermann on this. A Christian response should be cutting across the debates on TV and on the political blogs. This is not to say that a Christian can't put on the hat of a citizen and wade into these waters. It is just to say that a distinctly Christian response to torture begins and ends in a very different place. It will begin and end with the torture of Jesus.
Email Subscription on Substack
Richard Beck
Welcome to the blog of Richard Beck, author and professor of psychology at Abilene Christian University (beckr@acu.edu).
The Theology of Faƫrie
The Little Way of St. ThĆ©rĆØse of Lisieux
The William Stringfellow Project (Ongoing)
Autobiographical Posts
- On Discoveries in Used Bookstores
- Two Brothers and Texas Rangers
- Visiting and Evolving in Monkey Town
- Roller Derby Girls
- A Life With Bibles
- Wearing a Crucifix
- Morning Prayer at San Buenaventura Mission
- The Halo of Overalls
- Less
- The Farmer's Market
- Subversion and Shame: I Like the Color Pink
- The Bureaucrat
- Uncle Richard, Vampire Hunter
- Palm Sunday with the Orthodox
- On Maps and Marital Spats
- Get on a Bike...and Go Slow
- Buying a Bible
- Memento Mori
- We Weren't as Good as the Muppets
- Uncle Richard and the Shark
- Growing Up Catholic
- Ghostbusting (Part 1)
- Ghostbusting (Part 2)
- My Eschatological Dog
- Tex Mex and Depression Era Cuisine
- Aliens at Roswell
On the Principalities and Powers
- Christ and the Powers
- Why I Talk about the Devil So Much
- The Preferential Option for the Poor
- The Political Theology of Les MisƩrables
- Good Enough
- On Anarchism and A**holes
- Christian Anarchism
- A Restless Patriotism
- Wink on Exorcism
- Images of God Against Empire
- A Boredom Revolution
- The Medal of St. Benedict
- Exorcisms are about Economics
- "Scooby-Doo, Where Are You?"
- "A Home for Demons...and the Merchants Weep"
- Tales of the Demonic
- The Ethic of Death: The Policies and Procedures Manual
- "All That Are Here Are Humans"
- Ears of Stone
- The War Prayer
- Letter from a Birmingham Jail
Experimental Theology
- Eucharistic Identity
- Tzimtzum, Cruciformity and Theodicy
- Holiness Among Depraved Christians: Paul's New Form of Moral Flourishing
- Empathic Open Theism
- The Victim Needs No Conversion
- The Hormonal God
- Covenantal Substitutionary Atonement
- The Satanic Church
- Mousetrap
- Easter Shouldn't Be Good News
- The Gospel According to Lady Gaga
- Your God is Too Big
From the Prison Bible Study
- The Philosopher
- God's Unconditional Love
- There is a Balm in Gilead
- In Prison With Ann Voskamp
- To Make the Love of God Credible
- Piss Christ in Prison
- Advent: A Prison Story
- Faithful in Little Things
- The Prayer of Jabez
- The Prayer of Willy Brown
- Those Old Time Gospel Songs
- I'll Fly Away
- Singing and Resistence
- Where the Gospel Matters
- Monday Night Bible Study (A Poem)
- Living in Babylon: Reading Revelation in Prison
- Reading the Beatitudes in Prision
- John 13: A Story from the Prision Study
- The Word
Series/Essays Based on my Research
The Theology of Calvin and Hobbes
The Theology of Peanuts
The Snake Handling Churches of Appalachia
Eccentric Christianity
- Part 1: A Peculiar People
- Part 2: The Eccentric God, Transcendence and the Prophetic Imagination
- Part 3: Welcoming God in the Stranger
- Part 4: Enchantment, the Porous Self and the Spirit
- Part 5: Doubt, Gratitude and an Eccentric Faith
- Part 6: The Eccentric Economy of Love
- Part 7: The Eccentric Kingdom
The Fuller Integration Lectures
Blogging about the Bible
- Unicorns in the Bible
- "Let My People Go!": On Worship, Work and Laziness
- The True Troubler
- Stumbling At Just One Point
- The Faith of Demons
- The Lord Saw That She Was Not Loved
- The Subversion of the Creator God
- Hell On Earth: The Church as the Baptism of Fire and the Holy Spirit
- The Things That Make for Peace
- The Lord of the Flies
- On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell
- Commitment and Violence: A Reading of the Akedah
- Gain Versus Gift in Ecclesiastes
- Redemption and the Goel
- The Psalms as Liberation Theology
- Control Your Vessel
- Circumcised Ears
- Forgive Us Our Trespasses
- Doing Beautiful Things
- The Most Remarkable Sequence in the Bible
- Targeting the Dove Sellers
- Christus Victor in Galatians
- Devoted to Destruction: Reading Cherem Non-Violently
- The Triumph of the Cross
- The Threshing Floor of Araunah
- Hold Others Above Yourself
- Blessed are the Tricksters
- Adam's First Wife
- I Am a Worm
- Christus Victor in the Lord's Prayer
- Let Them Both Grow Together
- Repent
- Here I Am
- Becoming the Jubilee
- Sermon on the Mount: Study Guide
- Treat Them as a Pagan or Tax Collector
- Going Outside the Camp
- Welcoming Children
- The Song of Lamech and the Song of the Lamb
- The Nephilim
- Shaming Jesus
- Pseudepigrapha and the Christian Witness
- The Exclusion and Inclusion of Eunuchs
- The Second Moses
- The New Manna
- Salvation in the First Sermons of the Church
- "A Bloody Husband"
- Song of the Vineyard
Bonhoeffer's Letters from Prision
Civil Rights History and Race Relations
- The Gospel According to Ta-Nehisi Coates (Six Part Series)
- Bus Ride to Justice: Toward Racial Reconciliation in the Churches of Christ
- Black Heroism and White Sympathy: A Reflection on the Charleston Shooting
- Selma 50th Anniversary
- More Than Three Minutes
- The Passion of White America
- Remembering James Chaney, Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman
- Will Campbell
- Sitting in the Pews of Ebeneser Baptist Church
- MLK Bedtime Prayer
- Freedom Rider
- Mountiantop
- Freedom Summer
- Civil Rights Family Trip 1: Memphis
- Civil Rights Family Trip 2: Atlanta
- Civil Rights Family Trip 3: Birmingham
- Civil Rights Family Trip 4: Selma
- Civil Rights Family Trip 5: Montgomery
Hip Christianity
The Charism of the Charismatics
Would Jesus Break a Window?: The Hermeneutics of the Temple Action
Being Church
- Instead of a Coffee Shop How About a Laundromat?
- A Million Boring Little Things
- A Prayer for ISIS
- "The People At Our Church Die A Lot"
- The Angel of Freedom
- Washing Dishes at Freedom Fellowship
- Where David Plays the Tambourine
- On Interruptibility
- Mattering
- This Ritual of Hallowing
- Faith as Honoring
- The Beautiful
- The Sensory Boundary
- The Missional and Apostolic Nature of Holiness
- Open Commuion: Warning!
- The Impurity of Love
- A Community Called Forgiveness
- Love is the Allocation of Our Dying
- Freedom Fellowship
- Wednesday Night Church
- The Hands of Christ
- Barbara, Stanley and Andrea: Thoughts on Love, Training and Social Psychology
- Gerald's Gift
- Wiping the Blood Away
- This Morning Jesus Put On Dark Sunglasses
- The Only Way I Know How to Save the World
- Renunciation
- The Reason We Gather
- Anointing With Oil
- Incarnations of God's Mercy
Exploring Preterism
Scripture and Discernment
- Owning Your Protestantism: We Follow Our Conscience, Not the Bible
- Emotional Intelligence and Sola Scriptura
- Songbooks vs. the Psalms
- Biblical as Sociological Stress Test
- Cookie Cutting the Bible: A Case Study
- Pawn to King 4
- Allowing God to Rage
- Poetry of a Murderer
- On Christian Communion: Killing vs. Sexuality
- Heretics and Disagreement
- Atonement: A Primer
- "The Bible says..."
- The "Yes, but..." Church
- Human Experience and the Bible
- Discernment, Part 1
- Discernment, Part 2
- Rabbinic Hedges
- Fuzzy Logic
Interacting with Good Books
- Christian Political Witness
- The Road
- Powers and Submissions
- City of God
- Playing God
- Torture and Eucharist
- How Much is Enough?
- From Willow Creek to Sacred Heart
- The Catonsville Nine
- Daring Greatly
- On Job (GutiƩrrez)
- The Selfless Way of Christ
- World Upside Down
- Are Christians Hate-Filled Hypocrites?
- Christ and Horrors
- The King Jesus Gospel
- Insurrection
- The Bible Made Impossible
- The Deliverance of God
- To Change the World
- Sexuality and the Christian Body
- I Told Me So
- The Teaching of the Twelve
- Evolving in Monkey Town
- Saved from Sacrifice: A Series
- Darwin's Sacred Cause
- Outliers
- A Secular Age
- The God Who Risks
Moral Psychology
- The Dark Spell the Devil Casts: Refugees and Our Slavery to the Fear of Death
- Philia Over Phobia
- Elizabeth Smart and the Psychology of the Christian Purity Culture
- On Love and the Yuck Factor
- Ethnocentrism and Politics
- Flies, Attention and Morality
- The Banality of Evil
- The Ovens at Buchenwald
- Violence and Traffic Lights
- Defending Individualism
- Guilt and Atonement
- The Varieties of Love and Hate
- The Wicked
- Moral Foundations
- Primum non nocere
- The Moral Emotions
- The Moral Circle, Part 1
- The Moral Circle, Part 2
- Taboo Psychology
- The Morality of Mentality
- Moral Conviction
- Infrahumanization
- Holiness and Moral Grammars
The Purity Psychology of Progressive Christianity
The Theology of Everyday Life
- Self-Esteem Through Shaming
- Let Us Be the Heart Of the Church Rather Than the Amygdala
- Online Debates and Stages of Change
- The Devil on a Wiffle Ball Field
- Incarnational Theology and Mental Illness
- Social Media as Sacrament
- The Impossibility of Calvinistic Psychotherapy
- Hating Pixels
- Dress, Divinity and Dumbfounding
- The Kingdom of God Will Not Be Tweeted
- Tattoos
- The Ethics of :-)
- On Snobbery
- Jokes
- Hypocrisy
- Everything I learned about life I learned coaching tee-ball
- Gossip, Part 1: The Food of the Brain
- Gossip, Part 2: Evolutionary Stable Strategies
- Gossip, Part 3: The Pay it Forward World
- Human Nature
- Welcome
- On Humility
Jesus, You're Making Me Tired: Scarcity and Spiritual Formation
A Progressive Vision of the Benedict Option
George MacDonald
Jesus & the Jolly Roger: The Kingdom of God is Like a Pirate
Alone, Suburban & Sorted
The Theology of Monsters
The Theology of Ugly
Orthodox Iconography
Musings On Faith, Belief, and Doubt
- The Meanings Only Faith Can Reveal
- Pragmatism and Progressive Christianity
- Doubt and Cognitive Rumination
- A/theism and the Transcendent
- Kingdom A/theism
- The Ontological Argument
- Cheap Praise and Costly Praise
- god
- Wired to Suffer
- A New Apologetics
- Orthodox Alexithymia
- High and Low: The Psalms and Suffering
- The Buddhist Phase
- Skilled Christianity
- The Two Families of God
- The Bait and Switch of Contemporary Christianity
- Theodicy and No Country for Old Men
- Doubt: A Diagnosis
- Faith and Modernity
- Faith after "The Cognitive Turn"
- Salvation
- The Gifts of Doubt
- A Beautiful Life
- Is Santa Claus Real?
- The Feeling of Knowing
- Practicing Christianity
- In Praise of Doubt
- Skepticism and Conviction
- Pragmatic Belief
- N-Order Complaint and Need for Cognition
Holiday Musings
- Everything I Learned about Christmas I Learned from TV
- Advent: Learning to Wait
- A Christmas Carol as Resistance Literature: Part 1
- A Christmas Carol as Resistance Literature: Part 2
- It's Still Christmas
- Easter Shouldn't Be Good News
- The Deeper Magic: A Good Friday Meditation
- Palm Sunday with the Orthodox
- Growing Up Catholic: A Lenten Meditation
- The Liturgical Year for Dummies
- "Watching Their Flocks at Night": An Advent Meditation
- Pentecost and Babel
- Epiphany
- Ambivalence about Lent
- On Easter and Astronomy
- Sex Sandals and Advent
- Freud and Valentine's Day
- Existentialism and Halloween
- Halloween Redux: Talking with the Dead
The Offbeat
- Batman and the Joker
- The Theology of Ugly Dolls
- Jesus Would Be a Hufflepuff
- The Moral Example of Captain Jack Sparrow
- Weddings Real, Imagined and Yet to Come
- Michelangelo and Neuroanatomy
- Believing in Bigfoot
- The Kingdom of God as Improv and Flash Mob
- 2012 and the End of the World
- The Polar Express and the Uncanny Valley
- Why the Anti-Christ Is an Idiot
- On Harry Potter and Vampire Movies
Richard,
Allegiance indeed. Perfect focus.
It seems to me that my comment on your previous post is more germaine to this post, so here it is again (edited and with additional thoughts). . . .
It seems to me that much of what Kahn is doing leads to Girard's notion of divinely authorized violence sacralizing the "social contract" and bringing or maintaining social peace. [The heart of the matter:] . . . innocence, guilt, and the use of violence to maintain order.
Similarly, Mark Danner's remarks in his "New York Review of Books" article, "The Red Cross Torture Report" gives sacralized violence its contemporary political context: "There is a reason that the myth of the 'ticking bomb' and the daring, ruthless US agent who will do anything to stop its detonation--anything including torture, a step that proves his commitment and his seriousness--is sacralized in popular culture, and not only in television dramas like '24' but in 'Dirty Harry' and the other movies that are its ancestors. The story of the ticking bomb and the torturing hero who defuses it offers a calming message to combat pervasive anxiety and fear--that no matter what horrible threats loom, there are those who will make use of untrammeled government power to protect the country. It also appeals to uglier and equally powerful emotions: the desire for retribution, the urge to punish and avenge, the felt need in the face of vulnerability to assert power."
After the fashion of Jack Bauer and Dirty Harry, Dick Cheney prejudges (in Girard's language, he), scapegoats the detainees at Abu Grab: "These are evil people. And we're not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek. If it hadn't been for what we did--with respect to the . . . enhanced interrogation techniques [nice Orwellian euphemism for torture] for high value detainees. . .--then we would have been attacked again."
A medievalism indeed: "Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset."
(These remarks were attributed to Pope Innocent III who when asked what to do about determining those loyal to the Church from the heretical Cathars.
Translation: "Kill them all. God knows His own." Modified version: "Kill them all. God will sort them out.")
Now this is not about liberal or conservative but about giving divine blessing to violence in order to eliminate evil. Both liberal and conservative are willing to engage in this kind of thinking. Kahn's categories, for the Christian, represent how we Americans and others, Christian or otherwise, are actually stuck in debating penal atonement theory, a theory which makes God complicit in the torture and death of Jesus.
Sadly and sometimes unwittingly, like Dick Cheney, all of us whether politically liberal or conservative will resort in thought or deed to scapegoating, torture, and violence. It is part of the water we swim in. It is why Jack Bauer and Dirty Harry speak to the American imagination. It is why Jesus said that the path is like a slim mountain trail:
"The way is hard and narrow and few there be that find it."
God help us all.
Amen and amen.
On my reading list for this summer is William Cavanaugh's Torture and Eucharist, an exploration of the awful endemic torture conducted under Pinochet in Chile and the Catholic Church's response. If I remember correctly, at some point the Church responded -- in that Catholic nation -- by excommunicating torturers; that is, by refusing to offer the Eucharist to those who tortured their fellow Christians in allegiance to the state.
It seems that book, and the Catholic Church's witness -- alongside, once again, MacIntyre's analysis of morality and tradition in After Virtue -- would shed remarkable light on this conversation. Bravo, Beck!
In moral development, universalizers are the ones that challenge the powers that be, because they have internalized "universiality", which is incoherent in this world. Because of their commitment to the universal they do disrupt the social order, in their questions, lifestyle and behavior. But, neither the political power nor the spiritual power maintain the allegience of these. They are their own person and have developed their own values. It is the "ideal" in particularity.
Their ultimate convictions will play out in their commitments, as they understand the complexity and paradox of life.
Richard,
Sorry to break silence (again) here, but I've been thinking about what, if anything, must be sacrificed to be authentically Christian? What should be accounted in "counting the cost?" The answer that I believe best fits the passion narrative is, "One must sacrifice the ever-present temptation that I will seek to get others to make sacrifices for me--or one's favored idol." Sacrifice is sacrificed, in that sense, albeit not in the sense of what is freely offered in love.
It's too big a subject to go into here, but suffice it to say that my offering last spring would have been much better if I'd put this important piece in place--and I might not have suffered the wrath of George to boot.
Just in case the relevance to this post isn't as clear as it should be, a person who sacrifices the right to (others') sacrifice will be very reluctant to sanctify torture...
Tracy
Hey Tracy,
Sorry for the "wrath." It's a hangover [grin] from celebrating St. George's day yesterday.
Sacrifice sacrifice. The inflection is all important, and the way you put it says it better than all my words. The story of St. George slaying the dragon may ultimately be about sacrificing sacrifice.
Blessings!
Coop, it's obvious that Dick Cheney is your favorite whipping boy. It's convenient, of course: you don't have to make decisions for which a plausible case can be made that dozens, perhaps hundreds, and perhaps thousands of lives hang in the balance. If it were as simple as you appear to believe, one supposes that Obama would not be having any second thoughts at all about dispensing with the entire Bush/Cheney machinery. But he is having second thoughts on some significant aspects of it, now that he has a fuller understanding of the scenarios he faces, the intelligence (such as it is) that has been compiled, and the new level of responsibility that he has now that he is no longer organizing communities but stewarding national security.
And of course a political liberal loves the endpoint of Richard's analysis because it coincides with the liberal's predetermined, politically oriented "morality" endpoint; even if Richard locates the argument in a different "space," the outcome is conveniently the same as the political liberal's conclusion. So, quite predictably, Richard's "sovereignty" analysis allows the religious analysis to be co-opted by the political agenda. And Coop, you are now the poster child for that.
To be clear: qb is not defending some abstract notion of torture. He is simply arguing for a bit more candor, a bit less smugness, and a bit more circumspection about the responsibilities entailed by the presidency. Liberals loved to castigate conservative presidents for introducing religious considerations into their judgments about this or that domestic policy; but now the shoe is decidedly on the other foot as liberals seek to bolster their political case with distinctively religious arguments. It is a delectable irony.
Cheerfully,
qb
George,
I'm insanely jealous. I want a St. Tracy's day to celebrate the slaying of a dragon! Does anyone know where there is one--you know, a dragon that needs slaying?
qb,
The Christian message purports to be universal. So we shouldn't be surprised--those of us who are Christian--if it applies to both sides...
Tracy
qb,
Whether I am smug or not or you are disingenuous or not is immaterial.
Did you read what I wrote? I never once suggested that statecraft is easy. The issue of torture and scapegoating the innocent and the guilty, while intersecting politics and national security, also transcends politics. Which is why I spoke of Cheney, Jack Bauer, Dirty Harry, and Innocent III as synechdoches for the human condition.
And why would you assume that I wish to keep "religious considerations" from informing politics? I cannot, nor can liberals as much as they would like.
Blessings!
Tracy,
Most of the time when I try to slay my dragon, I end up shooting myself in the foot!
Blessings!
"Liberals and conservatives may disagree on the location of torture but they don't disagree about their sovereign allegiances".
I see similarities with the church's inter-denominational debate concerning the location of sovereignty and law in regards to God's judgement. It could be argued that regardless of where one resides within the doctrinal continuum, ultimately all sides in this debate pledge their allegiance to Christ.
SPEAKING WAY OVER MY HEAD NOW,
I might understand that allegiance to God/Christ is best proven by one facing the prospect of torture and death (martyrdom). During such an extremely morbid act , both the tortur-er and tortur-ee declare who, what, or where their respective allegiances lie. Reading much of Scripture, it appears that God/Christ expects no less than allegiance unto death (if necessary) from all of His followers.
Assuming eternal torment (torture) soteriology is true, what does God accomplish by continuously torturing those whose allegiance was expressed to anything other than Him??? Eternal torture is thus the final resolution for those who fail to pledge HIS sovereignty (whatever that might mean).
Would it be going too far to ask if torture might be a divinely sanctioned/designed tool used to prove and reveal where one's ultimate allegiance(s) lie?
Gary Y.
Hm. This is fascinating. Do you (Richard or any of the commenters) know of anyone who has changed their mind about this?
I found this interesting post, comparing the entrenched beliefs [of both sides] with Marian Keech and the UFO cult of 1954.
Daniel,
What do you mean by "anyone who has changed their mind about this"? What is "this" -- torture, sovereignty and law, etc.?
Hi Brad,
Sorry for the underdeveloped thought. What I was wondering about had to do with the article I linked (as well as Richard's post): i.e., whether the newly divulged facts or someone realizing their Christian allegiance supersedes their national allegiance had changed their perspective on the US government's [former] interrogation/torture program.
*someone realizing that their Christian allegiance supersedes...
Hello Everyone,
I've been reading the comments all day and thinking about them but haven't had time to respond given my day at work (and family life tonight). For now, some quick observations about the nature of this post:
1. As many will note, I don't actually say what the Christian position on torture should be. The inference may seem clear, but you'd be making that inference, not me. That is, if the crucifixion of Jesus points toward a "liberal" stance on the issue of torture then so be it. My argument is simply that any Christian conversation about torture should both begin and end with the cross. That, to me, seems beyond dispute. For Christians at least.
2. The goal of this post is simply to say that Christians will, by being Christians, bring different warrants to the torture debates. That is, a Christian response to torture should look different. It shouldn't look liberal or conservative. A Christian response to torture might, in the end, wind up in a liberal or conservative position but the warrants should look very different. (And, to be honest, I don't see how a Christian could be consistently liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican.) More specifically, the role of US sovereignty in these debates, I'm suggesting, is attenuated, by definition, in the Christian stance. I say "by definition" in that I define "Christian" as anyone holding faith in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus as their highest political allegiance.
The Catholic Church had one of the most infamous instatutionalized torture plans going - the inquisition. And for those who believe in hell, God is the ultimate torturer. Maybe the liberal/conservative divide still works, even within Christianity. The liberal Christians (like me) will be against torture and the conservative Chrisitans will find a reason to justify it.
Richard,
You disconnect "reality", that is real world living in a political realm, where we have to "play out our convictions" either Democratically or Republican. That is if you believe that we should be a part of the "world" and Christian doesn't mean some sectarian Anabaptist stance...
Surely, you don't believe that Christian can only have the definition you propose? I guess I'm not a Christian, but I don't like labels anyway, as they always seem to be misunderstood, because of the "baggage" we bring to the "word" "Christian".
I weary of the whole discussion,as it concerns "christian' as it becomes a judgment call based on certain specified convictions that are universalized, when they should never be...this is the "torture" that the Church is guilty of..
If all truth is God's, then why is there any "fear" about learning, using one's brain, striving to understand?
As to the "cross", that, too, becomes a way to "torture" those who need "pruning", "correction", "discipline", etc. in the name of "growth", "development",and "fruit". And this "torture" is called "Christian Love and Concern"!
Richard and the group:
Just asking ... do we (Christians) all agree that there is no place in a modern Democracy for 'torture'?
Frank
Richard and the group:
Perhaps apologies are required ... I did post a question and now I am just wondering, perhaps it was not appropriate ... no hurt to anyone intended. No actual on line reply is required.
Frank
Frank,
It's fine to ask a direct question. I tend to go for indirection, mainly for pragmatic grounds, to facilitate reflection rather than debate.
First, I would be loathe to characterize any response to any issue as "Christian." As many have noted above, Christians have endorsed wildly immoral activities as "Christian." The point being, I have no doubt a Christian could spin torture as being a faithful response to the gospel.
But in my opinion, I don't see how a response centered upon the cross could endorse torture. I'm willing to see a counter-example, but I think it would be a pretty difficult argument to make. And, again, if the cross gets in the way of defending torture, well, that's not my fault. You (not you Frank, the cross-is-consistent-with-torture interlocutor) signed up for the Christian faith and that ride begins and ends at Calvary.
I do think torture can be defended. But only by making the US the ultimate sovereign, the highest moral good, the final allegiance. That is the gist of what these posts are about. I'm aware of the very powerful arguments for torture (the ticking time bomb) and am not unaffected by them. That is why I put them on equal footing with the liberal arguments in Part 1, treating those arguments respectfully. But in the end those arguments (and the liberal arguments) are not Christian responses. They are political responses (made shrill by the baggage people have about about the Bush/Cheney years, either attacking or defending them). Which is fine, but I'm after the distinctly Christian stance.
On a different but related note. I empathize with my conservative/Republican Christian friends. I would not want to be in the place, as a Christian, of defending torture. And yet, you also feel the need to defend your guy from being savaged by the Radical Left. So I see the tensions and understand how the emotions are running high.
To pick up on some of your comments:
I appreciate the additional analyses from George, Brad, Angie, qb and Tracy. And Cheers all around for St. George's day. Next year in Ireland!
Let me call attention to Gary and Crystal's comments about torture and hell. As I've written these posts I've been struck by how one could read the Bible through the lens of torture. And the hell passages are hard. Does God torture? Does God threaten torture to get "confession"?
Daniel asked the question, Do we know of any cases where people have changed their minds on this issue? I don't. But as a psychologist I'm convinced that people don't actually change their minds all that much. People generally swim in a sea of self-evident truths looking for confirmatory data. That is, changing one's mind is like changing identity or personality. It's a heroic act. And heros are rare.
Richard and the group:
Richard thank you for that considered response.
Frank
All of you have got me thinking about universals/particulars, and perfect/imperfect scenarios, when it comes to faith and the real world. I think what we believe about universals/particulars, as it concerns the world, individuals, the Church, etc. does affect one's stance towards how one understands the perfect/imperfect world (is it perfectable, as in "God's Kingdom"), or not, and where do we draw those lines and what is the universal standars whereby we come to the definition of "perfect"?
Is the individual perfectable? on waht basis is perfection defined, and how is it measured...
There could be a chart made about this with different "colors" of faith played out in how it is 'put together" or understood...
Oh, one aspect I didn't add is, how one understands the world and faith does account for how we defend our stance toward torture...
If you're saying that within the Christian community, Christian liberals have some powerful ammunition to use when arguing against torture, I think you're right.
But I think Kahn's categories are wrong. It's not that conservatives speak "sovereignty" while liberals speak "legality". It's that conservatives misunderstand the ideals of a liberal democracy, and therefore they misunderstand what it means to be loyal to the United States of America.
Daniel and Richard,
Regarding whether anyone has changed his or her mind about this, I can speak for myself, at least, and say that I have. I won't get into all the nitty gritties (never actually spelled that out before...), but in the summer of 2006 I spent a few months doing mission work in Uganda and Rwanda, and while there read a couple deeply influential books. The combination of my experiences, the books, and the missionaries radically changed my opinion on a host of issues, and one of them was torture.
And I should add, that before going, I was good friends with a number of hardline liberals and pacifists (etc., etc.) with whom I had debates cheerful as well as heated. I was very staunch and rational in my beliefs about violence, war, and torture as an American Christian -- but those beliefs were changed radically. My wife says I came back a different person.
So! There is one example.
(P.S. The books were Douglas John Hall's God & Human Suffering and Lee Camp's Mere Discipleship.)
I think I agree with John Crichton of Farscape - the weather changes, but people just go on making the same mistakes. :)
I haven't really changesd my beliefs about war, torture, or any other social/political issue since I was a teen - even converting from atheism to Catholicism hasn't changed me from being a liberal.
Richard,
I've read your series on universalism, and some of what you've written on hell, but this post has seemed to stimulate profound thoughts about the relationship between a Christian understanding of torture centered on the cross, and any coherent doctrine of hell that is no less cruciform. I wonder if you have any resources to point us toward, and/or if a series exploring the matter would be in order. (Yes, that is a formal series request.)
I guess I'm wondering if, even as a universalist, you can imagine a coherent Christian doctrine of hell that does not diminish the Christian witness against torture through a theology of the cross. That is, is "hell" anything substantively different than endless, cross-like torture akin to an eternal Abu Ghraib? If so, how do we imagine it and what might be its theological grounding?
Hm.
Richard,
I'm coming to understand/agree that "people don't actually change their minds all that much". I guess that leads me to wonder, what's the point? What good does it do to insist that for Christians, a discussion of torture begins at the cross - if Christians aren't willing to change their minds?
(I'm just really disgusted/depressed by interacting with a bunch of Christians bending themselves backwards to theologically support Christians accepting the government torturing people.)
Richard and the group:
A bit of reflexivity:
I recall the first and immediate thoughts that entered my head when I originally saw the series of posts on torture emerge. The order is not important, thoughts the immediate ones at least don’t usually come like that, in ordered sequence. One has a thought or series of thoughts and then attempts to order and discipline them. (meta-cognitively) In any event the thoughts I refer to, include Mr Donald Rumsfeld poetic contribution on the Unknown. He once famously said …
‘As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.’
The next thought came via a reading of Fedor Dostoevsky where he once famously said … sometimes ‘knowing is not enough’. Next came the thought that Rumsfeld’s poetic contribution was very similar to the shape of the ‘cycle of learning’ all be it incomplete. Finally I started to recall aspects of Douglas Hofstadter’s book ‘I am a strange loop’. That is it.
Later I made a few ‘post’ comments on the topic and finally I asked a question. I suppose the point of this post is to ask one further question. So once again … just asking … ‘after reading a series of excellent articles, after considering some excellent posts, how does one know that learning (change) has taken place’. I know that Richard ‘knows’, I know that Richard has ‘learned’ because he has affirmed so.
Blessings,
Frank
Frank
It is true that the "possilbility" of learning is never complete. But, one must have an attitude toward life and issues that are "open-ended", that in unprejuidiced to benefit from any learning experience, formal or otherwise.
So, if one has an open attitude toward life, enough confidence of "self" and a hunger to know then there will be an optimistic, and hopeful heart that embraces change, challenge and even, conflict (maybe that is more personality speicific)...