Responsible action

That the generations to come might know, and the children yet unborn; that they in their turn might tell it to their children; So that they might put their trust in God (Ps. 78: 6-7)

The ultimate question for a responsible man to ask is not how he is to extricate himself heroically from the affair, but how the coming generation is to live. It is only from this question, with its responsibility toward history, that fruitful solutions can come, even if for the time being they are very humiliating. In short, it is much easier to see a thing through from the point of abstract principle than from that of concrete responsibility. The rising generation will always instinctively discern which of these we make a basis for our actions, for it is their own future that is at stake. - Letters and Papers from Prison Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Social ethics can be done in abstraction. You know, that’s the process in which we are dealing with ideas not events, it isn't very concrete. It’s a very useful way to deal with ideas. But when the necessity to act is upon a person or a nation, things get very concrete.

From an earlier posting - Abstract principle and concrete responsibility: A God who demands bold action and promises forgiveness - ‘You may want to say, but there’s a problem with Bonhoeffer’s approach. We need principles to ground and guide us. I’d say, yes, Bonhoeffer knew that. That’s why it was a moral dilemma for him. That’s why there was a need for forgiveness for his bold action. Deciding that, in this case, there needed to be a tilt toward bold action and concrete responsibility must have been rooted in his assessment of the situation in front of him, what was necessary for the well-being of future generations, what he knew of German and world history, and his broad sense of social ethics.”

So he shepherded them with a faithful and true heart *
and guided them with the skillfulness of his hands. (Ps 78:72)

So, I’ll stay with that, the “assessment of the situation in front of him, what was necessary for the well-being of future generations.” That’s the issue before those making the decisions in Iran, Israel and Washington.

By the time this posting appears the ground may have shifted. Concrete decisions made: the US provides the bombs necessary to destroy Iran's nuclear capacity or Israel launches a ground operation or the United States continues to provide support for Israel by replenishing weapon supplies and using American assets to intercept Iranian missiles or …..

All those possible concrete actions are about engaging “the situation in front” of us, hopefully with a thought to “the well-being of future generations.”

It's possible to get caught up in the more abstract discussions positioning left versus right values and perspectives. That can be a relief when the concrete choices being discussed are not to our liking or are simply terrifying. However, the hard work of social ethics in any given moment is more concrete. It is in rooms in Iran, Israel, and Washington that people gather and decisions are made. In the United States all those voices are going to be from a conservative perspective. And what we know is that even in that right wing world, there is significant disagreement about what responsible action looks like.

The big picture

This is the most informative conversation I've seen on the dynamics of what is happening among the decision makers in Israel, Washington and Iran.

Niall Ferguson and Dexter Filkins: The Iran-Israel War is a discussion “about how to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, whether or not Israel can win the war on its own, and how the conflict fits into a twenty-first-century cold war between the U.S. and China.” Niall Ferguson is a historian who is the Milbank Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Dexter Filkins is an American journalist who writes for The New Yorker. He wrote The Forever War (2008)

Conservations vs. Conservative

Should the U.S. Intervene in Iran? Simone Ledeen is a national security professional with experience in defense policy, intelligence, and counterterrorism. Dan Caldwell was a senior adviser to the Secretary of Defense. Ledeen favors American involvement, Caldwell resists it.

Splendor and honor and kingly power *
are yours by right, O Lord our God,
For you created everything that is, *
and by your will they were created and have their being;
And yours by right, O Lamb that was slain, *
for with your blood you have redeemed for God,
From every family, language, people, and nation, *
a kingdom of priests to serve our God.
And so, to him who sits upon the throne, *
and to Christ the Lamb,
Be worship and praise, dominion and splendor, *
for ever and for evermore.
A Song to the Lamb Dignus es

This abides,

Brother Robert, OA

The Feast of Marina the Monk, Monastic, 5th c.