IN A NEW REPORT bishops of the Church of England have urged Western Christians to apologize for the Iraq War as an "act of truth and reconciliation." The committee of bishops, chaired by the bishop of Oxford, Richard Harries, also linked U.S. "imperialism" to the influence of U.S. evangelicals, who seemingly pose the real threat to world peace: "No country should see itself as the redeemer nation, singled out by God as part of his providential plan," the bishops warned America, which is ostensibly consumed with religious zeal for conquest.That liberal British bishops do not like U.S. foreign policy and its reliance on "brute power and fear" is fairly predictable. But their efforts to connect U.S. military actions to the alleged "end-times" theology and the influence of U.S. evangelicals is somewhat of a new twist.
"Countering Terrorism: Power, Violence and Democracy Post-9/11" was written by a working group of five bishops at the request of the Church of England's House of Bishops. It offers apologies for the U.S.-British removal of Saddam Hussein, condemns American "moral righteousness" (while urging greater reliance upon the United Nations as the "legitimate authority for military intervention"), and faults the West for not making more "compelling" arguments against Iran's nuclear weapons program.
Bishop Harries was joined by the bishops of bishops of Coventry, Worcester, Bath, and Wells. These prelates preside over ancient dioceses that, in all likelihood, are full of empty churches. (By some counts, Britain has more mosque-going Muslims than church-going Anglicans.)
But, as we have seen
in liberal mainline churches in America, the lack of a flock does not deter political outspokenness. In fact, the opposite seems to be case. Perhaps a lack of liturgical duties allows time for more "prophetic" denunciations.
Unlike the British bishops, U.S. evangelicals actually do represent millions of believers. But this greatly alarms the bishops, because evangelical influence is fanning the flames of U. S. "imperialism." Indeed, a "narrow" and "pre-Enlightenment" form of evangelicalism may explain the Bush administration's "intransigence" on issues from same-sex marriage to support for Israel, the bishops explain. This "fundamentalist" Christianity is now pushing for American "hegemony" around the world, the report surmises--without really offering substantive evidence.
According to the bishops, the "apocalyptic fantasies" of American evangelicals are fueling an "unquestioning acceptance of violence in the name of God" and support for "unbridled American power." The 100-page report lumps together all of the most dreaded bugaboos of European leftists: the Bush administration, evangelical Christians, and U.S. economic and military power. American expansionism, not Islamist terrorism, is portrayed as "the major threat to peace."
According to the bishops, U.S. imperialism is different from other empires because of its "strong sense of moral righteousness," which is a "dangerous illusion," and which is fed by the "major influence of the 'Christian Right' on present U.S. policy."
Likewise, the bishops are careful to point out that Western democracy is "deeply flawed." Meanwhile, the Iranian theocracy may not be as nasty as popularly portrayed. The bishops chirpily suggest that Tehran might forgo its nuclear weapons program if the West offered a "suitably attractive incentive package" and more "security assurances." In fact, "the public and political rhetoric that Iran is a rogue regime, an outpost of tyranny, is as fallacious as the Iranian description of the U.S. as the Great Satan."
At least the bishops do grant that America is not the Great Satan. It is a rare moment of generosity. Another such moment occurs when the bishops condemn the "crusade" approach of "right-wing Christian rhetoric in the United States" while also admitting this problem has been present in "some Muslim attitudes to war," too.
In fairness, the report takes an occasional break from loopiness. It rejects complete pacifism, admits that immediate withdrawal from Iraq would be "irresponsible," acknowledges that the war did end Saddam Hussein's "tyranny," and concedes that establishing democracy in the Middle East is desirable. But it regrets that the war may have been motivated by "American national interest" (though it does not admit to any British or international interest in removing Saddam).
An apology to Muslims for the Iraq War, the bishops suggest, could be offered at a "public gathering, well prepared in advance," based on the precedent of Roman Catholic apologies for Jewish pogroms of the Middle Ages or the Dutch Reformed Church regretting Apartheid in South Africa. The bishops grant that such an apology would draw "denigration from predictable quarters."
The Church of England, like U.S. mainline Protestantism, is imploding demographically while evangelical and other forms of orthodox Christianity are growing around the world. Perhaps these bishops and other critics of conservative Christianity, rather than relying upon fears and stereotypes, should more closely examine the reasons behind their own declining cultural influence.