On another note, the presiding bishop of my church has asked Episcopalians to join her in supporting the Christian Peace Witness for Iraq. In doing so, she joins with many, many church groups. Here they are:
Adventist Peace Fellowship • American Friends Service Committee • Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America • Brethren Witness • Catholic Peace Fellowship • Christian Alliance for Progress • Christian Peacemaker Teams • Disciples Peace Fellowship • Episcopal Peace Fellowship • Every Church a Peace Church • Kairos: A Time to Speak, A Time to Act • Kirkridge Retreat and Study Center • Leadership Conference of Women Religious • Lutheran Peace Fellowship • Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns • Methodist Federation for Social Action • No2Torture • On Earth Peace • Pace e Bene Nonviolence Service • Pax Christi USA • Pentecostal Charismatic Peace Fellowship • Peace and Justice Support Network of Mennonite Church USA • Presbyterian Peace Fellowship • Protestants for the Common Good • Sisters of Mercy of the Americas • Sojourners/Call to Renewal • United Church of Christ (Justice and Witness Ministries).
I have trouble with mass witness, whether it is sponsored by my colleagues and coreligionists or by what one of my old friends has called The Billy Graham Religion. Still, if I were able to go to Washington on March 16th and join these good people I would go. As it is I join their common prayer for a just end to this war.
what can i say?
I say lets look at how peace can be achieved.
the radical ends of the spectrum demonstrate the mighty tug that threatens to divide; however, those who can maneuver that obstacle strewn middle ground can edge us toward a solution.
the problem with the rhetoric is that the extremists seem to be most heard and those leaning to one side or another are stereotyped as extremists and the extremist position is heralded as the position of the opposition when most of their cohorts in philosophy do in fact hold a less extreme positon.
the extreme is not the example.
this war is unique in that its aims wre either “straw men”, allegations without substance as in the case of WMD’s, or somewhat hypoocritial, as in Taking Saddam out because of his oppressive regime (when so many exist around the world), or are now quite nebulous, as an afterthought to excuse the war in the first place; there is no clear evil, or no evil that does not exist elsewhere that our govt allows elsewhere, or a definite line between the evil of the other side and that which others perceive of us.
the common perception grows that this is an incursion not well thought out, a quagmire in which we can become mired, draining resources and humans for decades to come with no clear outcome, thus opposition grows to this war.
it is straining our resources, mainly human, overutilizing them.
many of our citizens do not think that there is just cause, or reward or a favorable outcome to this.
too much seems to be hidden. suspiscion grows.
patriotic fervor hs given way to questions.
thus the movement mentioned in the above post.
regarding the extremist views, i have read many tomes citing the extremist view as an example of the entire view — saing, in essence, that “all cats are lions”. This perception does not do justice to the discourse. It simply distances whoever states such from the more rational middle ground.
the way to solutions and peace is not through the debate of the extremes, but the reasoned discourse of the great middle ground.
scattered thoughts here, to be sure, but I needed to state them.
Thanks for this, Dale. I like your thoughts.