Here we go again! I'm not sure what to think. On the one hand, yeah. But on the other hand, I think Shane is missing something.

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.sojo.net%2F2011%2F04%2F11%2Fmy-letter-to-the-irs-i-reserve-the-right-not-to-kill%2F&h=1440c

My Letter to the IRS: ‘I Reserve the Right Not to Kill’

by Shane Claiborne 04-11-2011

As a Christian, Easter marks the most stunning act of grace and enemy-love in human history — Jesus’ death and resurrection. As Jesus was being tortured and executed, he cried out for mercy, even for those terrorists who hurt him. As his buddy Peter picked up a sword and cut the ear off one of the persecutors, Jesus scolded Peter and picked up the ear and healed the wounded persecutor. The early Christians understood the message — it was a message of amazing grace. It was a message about how there is something worth dying for, but nothing in the world worth killing for — not even freedom or democracy. One of the early Christians said, “When Jesus disarmed Peter, he disarmed every Christian.” After all, we don’t see Christians picking up swords again for hundreds of years.

I am one of those Christians who believes we should still have the right not to kill, even in an empire that has a military bigger than Rome’s. Perhaps that’s why it has been hard for me to navigate what to do as tax season approaches, with so much of our federal tax money going towards militarism. It was a crisis familiar to the early Christians who were accused of insurrection and tax evasion because they had an allegiance that subverted, or superseded, their national allegiance.

So I respectfully filed my taxes this year, and I sent the IRS the letter below. My intention is to respect my country and contribute to the common good, but also to uncompromisingly follow the way of the nonviolent Jesus this Easter — in a world that continues to pick up the sword … and die by the sword.

Dear Internal Revenue Service,

I am filing my 1040 here. As you will see, I made $9,600 this past year, and found that according to the 1040 form, I owe $324.44 of that to federal taxes. While I am glad to contribute money to the common good and towards things that promote life and dignity, especially for the poor and most vulnerable people among us, I am deeply concerned that 30 percent of the federal budget goes towards military spending, with $117 billion going to support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. (Further, when we include the 18 percent that goes towards past military costs, such as the $380 billion in debt payments, 80 percent of which are military related debts, that number goes up to a total military budget of $1,372 billion — nearly half of the federal budget). My Christian faith and my human conscience require me to respectfully reserve the right not to kill, and to refrain from contributing money towards weapons and the military.

For this reason, I am enclosing a check for $227.11, which is, according to the form, 70 percent of what I owe. The remaining $97.33 represents 30 percent of my tax payment, the amount that would go toward military spending. I will donate this remaining 30 percent to a recognized U.S. nonprofit organization working to bring peace and reconciliation. My faith also compels me to submit to the governing authorities, which is why I am writing you respectfully and transparently here. I am glad to discuss this further if you have any questions.

May we continue to build the world we dream of,

Shane Claiborne

Post Edited (Similitude) : 5/10/2011 6:54:50 AM (GMT-5)

Post Edited (BBBCanada) : 5/10/2011 3:09:10 PM (GMT-5)

Post Edited (BBBCanada) : 5/11/2011 2:00:26 AM (GMT-5)

Post Edited (Similitude) : 5/11/2011 6:19:28 AM (GMT-5)

"Complicity" is a word Shane didn't use.  My guess is that he feels taxes are a too-direct form of involvement which would move him into the realm of culpability.  The 'complicity' issue is a red herring - a case of a word meaning so much that it ends up describing everything and so becoming useless.  "Complicit" ends up meaning "existing."  So let's trash the term and move on.

It seems that there are quite a few people out there who've had bad experiences with arrogant left-leaning Christians.  That doesn't surprise me.  But I've met Shane.  He's a nice guy.  He does practice what he preaches.  He puts up with snarky comments like...

"By the way, the $97.33 is so little that the IRS will probably do nothing.  Which tells me that not giving this money to the IRS for military purposes and giving it to an organization working to bring peace and reconciliation must make one feel good that they did their part at the end of the day. Wow.  That's a big sacrifice. " 

...and somehow manages to remain gentle.

I don't personally agree with the tax resisting approach.  While I agree that the money is put to evil purposes, I think the logic of the cross rules out putting our faith the god of 'effectiveness' or 'control'.  The empire took Jesus' body and did evil with it, yet Jesus claims to have been capable of resisting.  Today the empire takes our money and does evil with it, and like Jesus, we are called to hope in God rather than the efforts of some form of resistance.  I characterize it as supreme pessimism with regard to this age which we are told is passing away, and supreme optimism with regard to the kingdom of God.  This does not rule out all planning or strategizing, but does remove such activity from the realm of moral obligation.  Finding just the right way to subvert Babylon is not our calling (but nor is it forbidden); living a life informed of it's inevitable fall is our vocation.

Hmmm...sure...engage with the issues publicly and yes it can be done without condescension or condemning.  But if you are going to do that, you really do have to watch your p's and q's.  Jamie Smith last week had to explain that his comments on his blog about universalism were "off the cuff" because everyone was taking his blog TOO seriously. So some prefacing is necessary.  When you look at THIS ISSUE he may have to do something like that because Christians who comes down on the other side of the spectrum tend to think that this could be an occasion for condescension and division. 

Hey, I'm going to write a letter stating that I won't support violence with my taxes (who really wants to do that?) but I haven't thought through the complicity issues (which is in part why this STILL NEEDS TO BE a complicity issue and not a culability issue as noted by Asher because the point is is that Shane seems to be just a tad ironic/contradictory about being COMPLICIT with violence yet is complicit with so much else.  If he doesn't want to be culpable with violence then there is a helluva lot more he could be doing with regard to being culpable with so much else at least once he looks into those issues and by his NOT looking into them he will then be culpable by omission at least) but if you support the military through your taxes you are not only complicit but culpable, you know better now.

Post Edited (BBBCanada) : 5/13/2011 4:46:16 PM (GMT-5)