Before jumping headlong into this issue, can I suggest stepping back a bit and giving some thought to the more general question of what sort of stance an emerging church should take with regard to issues of this nature. I think we need to be careful that we do not simply revisit all the old arguments about war and pacifism, which were thoroughly explored (though not on this website particularly) at the time of the war in Iraq. It’s not that the old arguments aren’t relevant - it’s that I think we should be looking for a different framework within which to explore them. Fundamentally, we have to keep asking ourselves, What is the purpose of the church in the world? I was struck recently by the post-Babel ‘political’ context within which God calls Abraham. I’m sure this will be read in different ways, but the point remains: I don’t think we can discuss moral and political questions like this properly if we don’t keep the ‘vocation’ of the people of God in view.

I also think it’s worth registering the fact at the outset that Jesus advocated a policy of non-violence for the people of God as they confronted the reality of an oppressive pagan military presence in Palestine. This does not provide a straightforward analogy for the situation of the believer in a modern democratic state confronted with complex internal and external conflicts. Jesus could recommend non-violence because he believed that God would vindicate (and raise from the dead) those who trusted in him as an alternative way (the only way) through the crisis of the end of the age. A secular state does not have that hope - we are dealing with a very different game and the same rules don’t necessarily apply.