9/11 Twenty Years Later - Part 2

Children of Longsight, 1980s

The previous post republished first responses following the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York. Here, I repeat my follow-up in view of responses to my message. [21 September 2001]

Last week’s letter, unsurprisingly I suppose, has evoked more response than average. These have varied from affirmation of similar feelings, to disagreement, to incomprehension. What has interested me most has been the silences from people whom I might have expected to hear from... It seems the last paragraph was the most provocative. I wrote it as a signal—it was to voice concern in a direction that I was not yet ready to speak or write about, because it was still basically a concern without clear form. But, it was a signal with a desire to slow down the inexorable and overwhelming vocabulary of warfare that I was hearing. It has been interesting to read from some of you with your suggestions of what you think I might have meant by my rhetorical questions! So, I think I must return to this today. To begin, I cite that last paragraph:

Thoughts now turn to what will happen next. I fear the rhetoric of war which comes readily to lips right now. Violence has been done. Those men of violence will understand and expect violence in return. They will be prepared for that. What if America, as a Christian nation, reacted contrary to expectation, and responded in Christian love? I wonder what that would mean for us. I wonder what would happen. This was a theological question. One person asks me if I believe America to be a Christian nation. I do not. The question is, ‘what if...?’ But if, as others have written to me, the US now has a professing Christian in the White House, it seems that the question is reasonable. How should a Christian president act? What part does the Love Command (‘You will love the Lord with all your heart...and your neighbour as yourself’) have in such leadership?

Does the Love Command apply only in individual situations (where it is difficult enough)? Does ‘turn the other cheek’ apply in the one-on-one context? Is there one Christian ethic for personal piety, and another for nations who have been attacked by people who hate them? I know that asking such questions risks sounding pompous. But, they need to be asked. ‘War’ has been the first, and primary, response. Is no other response conceivable? 

Do not mistake me. I am not saying that there must not be justice for the victims of this crime; nor that the criminals are not worthy of punishment. I am asking whether war is the way to justice. 

It might be thought by some, as was written to us, that I can say such things because, ‘You are a lot safer in Britain’. Well, in 1996 the Manchester city centre was decimated by the largest IRA bomb to be detonated on the mainland. Only one person died (thanks to a ‘thoughtful’ warning from the IRA), but the city is still rebuilding from the damage. We live in the district of Longsight—in which at least 45 per cent of our neighbours are Muslim, with at least three mosques in short walking distance. So, the likelihood of warfare that encompasses terrorism and the Muslim world is not far away from us here. I am not simply an ‘armchair manager’. 

I also have a deeply personal involvement. We have a ‘Saturday Club’ in our church for local children, with leadership including a Muslim and a Catholic. Yesterday all the children attending were Muslim. I played ‘piggy in the middle’ with boys named Omah and Mohammed. Islam is not a distant ‘threat’, it is people I know. It includes friends of many years. 

The message I hear from these friends is that they are horrified by the attack on New York and Washington; that this is not Islam. But, they also believe that a violent response will only be adding another wrong—and two wrongs... 

Two messages I have received this week help to explain what I want to say. The first comes from India, in a message by an Afghani in exile:

...Let me now speak with true fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there with ground troops. When people speak of “having the belly to do what needs to be done” they’re thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as needed. Having the belly to overcome any moral qualms about killing innocent people. Let’s pull our heads out of the sand. What’s actually on the table is Americans dying...Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see where I’m going. We’re flirting with a world war between Islam and the West. And guess what: that’s Bin Laden’s program. That’s exactly what he wants. That’s why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It’s all right there. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It might seem ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and the West, he’s got a billion soldiers. If the west wreaks a holocaust in those lands, that’s a billion people with nothing left to lose, that’s even better from Bin Laden’s point of view. He’s probably wrong, in the end the West would win, whatever that would mean, but the war would last for years and millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the belly for that? Unfortunately, Bin Laden does. Anyone else?... What is this Afghani saying? He is saying that the attack on the US is precisely designed to get the West to react as it is—with war. This will be just what Bin Laden and others want. The rhetoric of warfare in the US right now, which declares how ready Americans are to die for freedom, and how we will fight for the American spirit, is just what the ‘terrorists’ want. Once bombs are exploded on Muslim soil, many more will rise up to fight against the West. So far, the terrorists are succeeding!

The second message comes from my daughter-in-law, who sent this from a friend who is sharing the Gospel with Muslims in Turkey.

…Most Muslims do not read and have not read the Koran. They are not aware of what the Koran says or instructs them to do. However, Muslim people need to decide if they agree with their holy book, the Koran. The God, of the Koran, takes delight in the death of Christians, Jews, or anyone that comes against Muslims. There is a blessing granted for any Muslim who kills a Christian or a Jew. In light of this past week, I believe, in love, we can confront this issue with Muslim people. I stress, that it must be in love. This is an extremely difficult time for everyone and the motive of the heart must be one of love. The Lord of the Harvest loves the people of the Middle East, Jew and Muslim. He desires to reap a harvest of many from this part of the world. I believe that even in the midst of the horror of death that we all witnessed, that the Lord Jesus wants to extend an invitation for eternal life. This is the approach that I will be lovingly taking with the Muslim friends that I have made. Many of you don’t even know any Muslims, but you can pray for them. Those of you that do have Muslim friends, please extend your hand of love towards them. Many of them are afraid and need Christians to take them in. Please stand against individuals who want to harm Muslims, just because of their religion. But this is the time to confront in love and challenge Muslims about what do they really believe.

These are profound words from a young woman. This is not the time to condemn, but to reach out in love. 

So, I come back to my earliest questions. If Christians, even in government, live by the Love Command, it must surely mean seeking ways to reach out positively, in love, to those Muslims in every Arab nation who live now in fear of American missiles. It would seem, to me, to mean that we would say, ‘You want war, but we refuse to accept.’ Can you imagine that? 

Instead, we will pursue the best for those who are now suffering warfare. We would pursue justice, not through violence, but by the rule of law and the ‘Bill of Rights’ we hold dear—applying them to non-Americans as to Americans. Then, people in Muslim countries would learn the meaning of ‘Christian’ through love instead of through bombs. 

That is my, ‘What if...?’

Reflections on these posts will follow.