Shuddering at the Rhetoric of Holy War

Thanks to J.C. Baker at the Progressive Baptist blog for calling my attention to an outstanding editorial by Robert Steinbeck in this morning's Ft. Worth Star-Telegram about "Whom are we Slaying?"

Steinbeck is responding to an op-ed by Cal Thomas entitled "The West's Language Problem." Specifically, Steinbeck takes offense at these statements by Thomas:

What we have is a problem that diplomacy cannot solve. It is a language problem, but even more than that. Languages can be learned and communication established. This is a religious divide. The president thinks people we see in bondage want to be as free as we Americans. In fact, many of them regard us as the ones in bondage and, in their religion, they see themselves as free. They regard our ways as decadent and our culture corrupt. They want no part of it. They are welcome to their 7th-century ways, but they are not welcome to impose those ways on the rest of the world.

. . .

Unable to cope with their failings and to justify their guilt, they seek to bring others down to their level. They will not be stopped by diplomatic appeals, or reason. They have taken up the sword and they must be made to die by the sword in sufficient numbers that even they will see the futility of their ways and be forced to engage in less warlike pursuits.

Steinbeck asks:

This is a Christian sentiment? We rightly condemn fanatical Muslims for countenancing the killing of innocent people. Does the same idea become noble when our side utters it?

Alas, I am questioning still. I question how any person of faith can read such an alarming treatise -- and not shudder.

I'm shuddering.