3 concerns the ERLC has shared with the administration about the Ukrainian crisis  
By / Mar 29

As the horrific war in Ukraine continues to unfold, the United States and the world are faced with a litany of challenges and concerns to address amidst the conflict. In addition to the geopolitical concerns, there is an ongoing humanitarian crisis that demands the attention of our world leaders. President Biden and allies of the U.S. have already taken a number of steps to hold President Putin accountable for his actions and to prevent the spread of this aggression. 

The United States has banned the importing of Russian oil, natural gas, and coal imports. Billions of dollars in humanitarian aid have already been sent to assist the war-torn region and support the brave Ukrainians defending their homeland. Additionally, the administration granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to Ukranians who are currently in the U.S.. This was an important way for the U.S. to stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine by ensuring that our Ukrainian neighbors do not have to fear deportation but can stay and work here, at least until the end of the conflict. 

On March 24, Biden announced that “the United States will welcome up to 100,000 Ukrainians and others fleeing Russia’s aggression,” and went on to state that “we’re focused on reuniting families and providing refuge to those in harm’s way.” The ERLC was grateful to see the U.S. and our allies take these important steps, and we recently sent a letter thanking the administration for these actions. In that letter, we also laid out three areas of particular concern for Southern Baptists that the Biden administration should consider and take proactive actions to address.

1. Supporting Ukrainian refugees in Europe and at home

Over 3.5 million people have already fled Ukraine and another 6.5 million are currently internally displaced within the country. It’s estimated that as many as 5 million refugees may eventually seek refuge outside of the country. Throughout Scripture, we are specifically commanded to care for refugees. While we commend Poland and other neighboring countries who have welcomed these vulnerable people in the face of this immediate crisis, we know that Western Europe and the U.S. will have a role to play as well. 

Many resettlement organizations in the U.S. are still struggling to fully rebuild after several challenging years and have been further stretched thin by the heroic work of resettling Afghan parolees. It is vital that we support these nations that have taken in refugees and invest in rebuilding our refugee resettlement program to allow many to find refuge in the U.S. in a timely fashion.

2. Protecting religious freedom for religious minorities

The belief that religious freedom is essential for all people to be able to live out their faiths fully is central for Southern Baptists. We are deeply concerned that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will be detrimental to the religious freedom enjoyed by Christians and other religious groups in the country. The Ukrainian church is among the most vibrant in Europe and is the primary missionary-sending country for Eastern Europe and Central Asia. 

While many of these believers have fled, many others have made the difficult decision to stay and minister to their neighbors in these difficult times. Reports of a Russian “kill list” include religious minorities, and there is strong reason to believe that those spared will face intense persecution and will be forced to practice their faith in secret. It is essential the the religious freedom of Christians and other religious minorities be kept at the forefront of any negotiations or strategies that might be considered.

3. Ensuring that intercountry adoption remains viable in Ukraine

These times of war and disruption often most severely harm those who are already vulnerable. Certainly, orphans in Ukraine fall into this category as they face imminent danger and diminishing resources. As Christians, we are specifically called to care for orphans around the world and view intercountry adoption as an important way of doing that. 

It is essential that intercountry adoption remain open and viable for these vulnerable children and for families who have already begun this process and are awaiting to be united with their children. When Russia invaded Crimea in 2014, they suspended foreign adoptions, and there’s grave concern that they could do the same if this illegal invasion of Ukraine is successful.

In these tragic times, we diligently raise these concerns to those in power and advocate on behalf of the most vulnerable in Ukraine. We also bolster this advocacy with fervent prayer. Christians must continue to seek God and pray for peace in our world, wisdom for our leaders, and protection for the vulnerable.

Explainer: The latest developments on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
By / Mar 11

As Russia continues to illegally wage war on Ukraine, new information breaks every few days, especially as this conflict is lived out in a digital age that offers 24/7, real-time access. Below are several important developments that you should know and pray about. 

Refugees flee to neighboring European countries. 

According to United Nations data, over 2.3 million people have fled Ukraine since February 24. (The total population of the country is around 44 million.) A spokesperson for UNICEF told NBC News that at least half of them are children, some of whom have been forced to travel on their own. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has stated that this is the fastest growing refugee crisis in Europe since World War II.

The majority of Ukranians who have fled the fighting have gone to neighboring countries like Poland, Hungary, Moldova, Slovakia, and Romania. Nearly 100,000, though, have gone to more distant countries such as Germany, France, and the U.K. Around 1.33 million people arrived in Poland, according to Poland’s embassy to the European Union, and Germany’s interior ministry registered a total of 80,035 refugees. 

Russia accused of bombing a children’s hospital

On Wednesday, the Russians proposed a 12-hour ceasefire to provide evacuation corridors from select cities such as Kyiv, Chernihiv, Sumy, Kharkiv, and Mariupol. But during that time period, Russian forces reportedly bombed a maternity and children’s hospital in Mariupol that killed three people, including one child. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the bombing was “proof of a genocide.”

The United Nations Human Rights Office says that at least 549 civilians have been killed in Ukraine since Russia’s invasion. 

Governments and multinational corporations impose additional sanctions on Russia

President Joe Biden announced a U.S. ban on imports of oil, natural gas, and coal from Russia. U.S. imports from Russia account for only 8% of America’s energy, of which only about 3% was crude oil. The EU also plans to cut gas imports from Russia by two-thirds this year, and the U.K. says it will phase out “the import of Russian oil and oil products by the end of 2022.”

The U.K. has also frozen the assets of seven Russian oligarchs, including one that owns an English soccer team. Additionally, the U.K. has made it a criminal offense for Russian aircraft to enter British airspace. 

A number of international companies have also imposed voluntary sanctions. The list of companies includes Apple, Disney, Ford, MasterCard, McDonalds, and Visa. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo announced they would be pulling some products from the country.

“The private sector is united against Russia’s vicious war of choice,” said President Biden. 

Russians shut down Chernobyl nuclear plant

On the first day of the invasion, Russian forces seized control of the Chernobyl power plant in northern Ukraine, the site of the world’s worst nuclear disaster. The plant was disconnected from the state’s power grid which led the Ukrainian government to warn of possible radiation leak.

But the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says there has been “no critical impact” to the safety of Chernobyl. According to IAEA, the “heat load of spent fuel storage pool and volume of cooling water at #Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant [is] sufficient for effective heat removal without need for electrical supply.”

Ukraine’s energy minister said the country is doing “everything possible” to restore the electricity supply to the power plant “as soon as possible.”

U.S. denies transfer of Polish fighter planes

Poland offered to provide more than two dozen military aircraft to Ukraine. The government of Poland said it could transfer its 28 MiG-29 fighter planes to a U.S. military base — Ramstein Air Base in Germany — where they could then be given to the Ukranians.

But the chief spokesperson for the Pentagon and the head of the U.S. European Command both announced that the U.S. wouldn’t take part in an agreement to give warplanes to Poland after it sends its fleet to Ukraine. “We do not support the transfer of the fighters to the Ukrainian air force at this time and have no desire to see them in our custody either,” said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby. 

As this tragic war wages on, Christians should fight for peace through persistent prayer and advocacy in our sphere of influence. Our hope is that God, in his sovereignty and mercy, can bring this conflict to an end and spare lives. The Bible says, “The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the LORD; he turns it wherever he will” (Prov. 21:1). We ought to fervently pray that God would turn President Putin’s heart away from war, that he would protect those in harm’s way, and that he would give leaders in the U.S. and around the world the wisdom and fortitude to do what’s right.  

What the war in Ukraine is teaching us about our culture’s longing for virtue
By / Mar 10

“I need ammunition, not a ride.” Those words sound like they could have been taken right out of the script for Band of Brothers. Instead, they were supposedly spoken several weeks ago in the context of a present war by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as he politely rejected an offer from the United States to evacuate him from his country ahead of Russia’s cruel and violent invasion. 

Zelenskyy, a former comedy actor, was elected president of Ukraine in 2019 on 73% of the popular vote. Presenting himself as an “everyman” and rejecting the pomp that usually accompanies high office, he was elected on the promise of eliminating corruption and negotiating peace in his country’s war-torn regions. In his mid-40s with a family that includes two young children, Zelenskyy seems the least likely candidate to be leading the military defense of his overmatched nation. No one would have blamed him for taking the offer to evacuate.

C.S. Lewis and the four cardinal virtues

It’s been nearly eight decades since the last large-scale ground invasion of a sovereign European nation by another nation. As Nazi bombs fell on his native land during that worldwide conflict, a university professor by the name of C.S. Lewis, himself a veteran of the First World War, gave a series of radio broadcasts that would later become the book known today as Mere Christianity. 

In a time of great uncertainty, Lewis’ voice filled the airwaves with a message of hope. In a world of violent division, Lewis offered his fellow citizens the opportunity for unity in the gospel of Jesus Christ. With his words he sought to construct a section of solid ground to steady the wobbly feet of a war-weary people. Those talks are still widely read today.

In his presentation of “mere Christianity,” Lewis briefly treated the four cardinal virtues — character traits that “all civilized people recognize.” These virtues are prudence, temperance, justice, and fortitude. In his brief treatment of fortitude, Lewis defines the virtue as “both kinds of courage — the kind that faces danger as well as the kind that ‘sticks it’ under pain.” He then writes, “You will notice, of course, that you cannot practice any of the other virtues very long without bringing this one into play.”

The importance of fortitude (courage)

It’s this last point that interests me. How does fortitude, or courage, apply to the practice of all the other virtues? Lewis doesn’t elaborate further in Mere Christianity. If you want his deeper thoughts on the subject, you must turn to The Screwtape Letters, written during that same Second World War-period, in which the senior demon Screwtape advises his nephew demon Wormwood on how best to tempt human beings.

In letter 29, Screwtape references the war and turns his demented attention to the subject of how to use war to tempt humans away from God and virtue. Here Lewis writes, from the perspective of the demon, “Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point, which means, at the point of highest reality. A chastity or honesty, or mercy, which yields to danger will be chaste or honest or merciful only on conditions. Pilate was merciful till it became risky” (Mark 15:15).

Without courage, Lewis says, you can’t have any true virtue, because courage is necessary to persevere in any virtue through trial and danger. Without courage, our mercy will fail as soon as opposition arises. Without courage, our honesty will give way to deceit as soon as the pressure mounts. Without courage, we are victims to the whims of circumstances beyond our control. One needs courage or all virtue fails.

No one knew how Zelenskyy would respond in leading his country in the face of a demented tyrant with intimidating military power at his disposal. Thus far, the leader of Ukraine has shown the world that, contrary to what we’ve seen among many global leaders recently, virtue is not dead. In Zelenskyy, the world is watching courage on display, and he deserves our full support. As we mourn for the people of Ukraine, we should rejoice in the example of virtuous fortitude on display in Zelenskyy and so many others in Ukraine.

Cultivation of virtue depends on living pictures. We need to see examples of virtue being lived so that we will have well-trod trails in the wilderness of our own experience to follow. Christian people have always understood this. We know that we can only love and learn how to love by looking to the God who is love (1 John 4:16). Christ himself said, “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you” (John 15:12). How does Christ love us? Courageously, all the way to the cross and beyond.

Christ embodies all true virtue perfectly, including the courage that holds it all together. But in the example of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, we see an imperfect man willing to give his life for his country, and we are reminded that courageous virtue can still be found in unexpected places.

War refugee estimates, the State of the Union, and SBC president updates
By / Mar 4

In this episode, Brent and Lindsay discuss war refugee estimates by the UN, the State of the Union address, and SBC president updates, including Ed Litton not running for reelection and Willy Rice running for election. They also talk about how war reveals objective truth and a new ERLC resource for information regarding the Mississippi abortion case. 

ERLC Content

Culture

  1. War refugees | Axios: UN estimates 1 million refugees from the crisis
  2. French president talks to Putin | CNN: Macron believes “worst is yet to come” for Russian invasion
  3. State of the Union | BP
  4. SBC president updates | BP: Ed Litton announces he will not run for reelection and  Pastor Willy Rice announces run for SBC president
  5. Baseball | Yahoo Sports: MLB cancels Opening Day

Lunchroom

Connect with us on Twitter

Sponsors

  • Prison Fellowship | Second Chance Month // Every person has dignity and potential. But one in three American adults has a criminal record, which limits their access to education, jobs, housing, and other things they need to reach that potential. Join Prison Fellowship this April as they celebrate “Second Chance Month”. Find out how you and your church can help unlock second chances for formerly incarcerated people who have repaid their debt to society. Learn how at prisonfellowship.org.
  • Psalm 139 Project // Through the Psalm 139 Project, the ERLC is placing 50 ultrasound machines by the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade in 2023, and thanks to the overwhelming generosity of Southern Baptists and our pro-life partners, we’re already halfway to our goal. But requests for these lifesaving machines continue to pour in from around the country, and our team can’t keep up without your help. Will you take a stand for life by helping us place our next ultrasound machine? One hundred percent of financial contributions designated to the Psalm 139 Project go toward purchasing ultrasound machines and providing training for workers. Learn more at ERLC.com/50by50.

What the horrors of war teach us about the nature of morality
By / Feb 28

On Feb. 24, the world watched in horror as Russian forces, under the leadership of President Vladimir Putin, began the invasion of neighboring Ukraine in an unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression. Airstrikes, heavy artillery, and infantry rained down on cities across Ukraine, including the capital of Kyiv. Through real-time updates on social media and wall-to-wall coverage on news outlets, we are able to see the horrors of war as never before. The Ukrainian people are proud and have valiantly continued to fight for their country against the Russian invaders who have been sold a bill of lies by the Kremlin. Putin, a totalitarian leader, is set on returning Russia to a past era of world dominance.

Images and videos have poured in to highlight the resiliency and determination of the Ukrainian people and the widespread support from all around the world. Alongside a recognition of the virtuous heroism on display from men and women throughout Ukraine, there has also been a resounding call from nations and people around the world rightly labeling this deadly invasion as evil and morally unjustifiable. It is nearly impossible to see what is taking place in Ukraine and to turn a blind eye toward the horrors of war and the reality of human suffering on display. Families have been ripped apart, civilians murdered, and thousands of soldiers have already been killed. While there are fringe voices aligning themselves with the Russian regime and its strong-man mentality, it is striking how unified voices have been in support of the Ukraine people under the incredible leadership of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Objective evil

One of the many things this crisis is revealing through the level of unified Ukrainian support is that there are certain objective and innate moral truths in the hearts of human beings all across the world. People from across political and ideological viewpoints are acknowledging these moral realities at play here, whether they recognize it or not. We are correctly calling this invasion evil and the intentions of the Russian regime morally wrong. And this is all taking place as our societies routinely act as if ethics is subjective and simply a human construct.

It is nearly impossible to see this type of devastation and the loss of human life in war as morally inconsequential or permissible. It is objectively wrong. In the comforts of peacetime or a relatively safe environment, it is easier to placate the claims of moral relativism or nihilism as we delude ourselves into acting as if objective moral categories do not exist or that we ultimately define our own realities. These tragic and devastating events can serve as a helpful reminder for all of us that deep down, each of us knows that there is an objectivity to good and evil — even if we suppress those truths in our unrighteousness and pride (Romans 1). This suppression is clearly seen today as the rallying cry of our age is moral autonomy and a hyper-individualism, where what is ethical and good is simply what we want to be true.

The foundation of morality

But God has created each of us in his image and with the capacity to know good and evil. In our sin, we delude ourselves into believing the lies that we are morally autonomous and independent of him who created us (Gen. 1:26-28; James 1:17; Roman 2:6). But as apologist Cornelius Van Til wrote in Christian Theistic Ethics, God did not create us as “intellectual and moral blank[s].” He created us to know him as well as certain truths about ourselves and the world around us. Without a Creator and created order, evil itself wouldn’t bother us or cause us to well up with righteous indignation like many of us are in light of these tragedies. Theologian Thomas F. Torrance explains this in Divine and Contingent Order writing, “evil would present no problem to us at all—we wouldn’t even be aware of it—if there were no objective and coherent rational order.” 

As created and dependent beings, we simply can not avoid using this type of moral language in light of these tragedies. It is rooted in our creation as image-bearers. In light of war and tragedy, we lose the ability to hide behind our false visions of subjective morality. But in moments like these, we are confronted with this fact — none of us truly live independent of God regardless of what we tell ourselves or what truths we suppress in our desire to be like God, defining what is good (Gen. 3:4-5).

As we continue to pray for the people of Ukraine and support various efforts to aid them in their fight against these invaders, let us remember the truth that what is taking place before our eyes is evil, but good will ultimately prevail — if not in this life than in the next (Revelation 21-22). We pray for peace and for justice because we instinctively know, as God’s image-bearers, that what we are witnessing through this devastating crisis in Ukraine is a battle between good and evil. No matter the intent of the Russian regime to alter the truth or peddle misinformation, there are objective moral standards that God himself has communicated to humanity through his world and in his Word.

Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, the decline of global democracy, and the Ahmaud Arbery federal murder trial
By / Feb 25

In this episode, Brent and Lindsay discuss Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, the decline of global democracy, and the Ahmaud Arbery federal murder trial. They also talk about the Queen’s recovery from COVID-19 and pursuing racial unity in the SBC. 

ERLC Content

Culture

  1. NBC News – Russia Launches Illegal Invasion of Ukraine
  2. Russia launched attacks on Ukraine from multiple fronts
  3. Putin’s speech
  4. Ukrainian president as a target
  5. Axios – Global democracy declines for 16th year, annual index finds
  6. CBS News – Ahmaud Arbery federal murder trial
  7. NBC News – Queen postpones more events after Covid positive

Lunchroom

Connect with us on Twitter

Sponsors

  • Prison Fellowship | Second Chance Month // Every person has dignity and potential. But one in three American adults has a criminal record, which limits their access to education, jobs, housing, and other things they need to reach that potential. Join Prison Fellowship this April as they celebrate “Second Chance Month”. Find out how you and your church can help unlock second chances for formerly incarcerated people who have repaid their debt to society. Learn how at prisonfellowship.org.
  • Psalm 139 Project // Through the Psalm 139 Project, the ERLC is placing 50 ultrasound machines by the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade in 2023, and thanks to the overwhelming generosity of Southern Baptists and our pro-life partners, we’re already halfway to our goal. But requests for these lifesaving machines continue to pour in from around the country, and our team can’t keep up without your help. Will you take a stand for life by helping us place our next ultrasound machine? One hundred percent of financial contributions designated to the Psalm 139 Project go toward purchasing ultrasound machines and providing training for workers. Learn more at ERLC.com/50by50.

What does a just end to the Russo-Ukrainian war look like?
By / Feb 25

If justice were to prevail in Ukraine, Russia would cease military operations, withdraw from the country, return Crimea and Donbas to Ukrainian control, publicly apologize, and provide restitution to Ukraine — and Vladimir Putin would resign the Russian presidency and turn himself in for a war crimes trial. Absent divine intervention, that will not happen. What, then, can we hope and pray for? What would a just end to the Russo-Ukrainian War look like? 

In my recent book on just war, I stressed the importance of working to achieve justice and peace in, through, and after war. Many debates about just war focus overmuch on the justice of starting wars. Was it justified to invade or not? (Spoiler: no). But justice demands much more of statesmen than that they fulfill a short checklist of criteria, as if just war were designed to be a permission slip for invasion. 

For a war to be just, it must result in lasting conditions of justice and peace in the aftermath — even if flawed and fallible, as all orders of justice and peace are in this fallen world. Russia cannot achieve justice in the aftermath of an unjust invasion, and whatever peace might befall Ukraine in the wake of a Russian conquest would be the peace of tyranny. As Tacitus said of the Romans, so too the Russians might succeed in creating a desert, and calling it peace. There is no justice in a Russian victory. 

What do justice and peace look like for Ukraine?

The harder question is for the Ukrainians and the international backers who are providing it with weapons and moral support and waging economic war on Russia through sanctions. What kind of justice or peace can we achieve? Is any achievable? Do we have any reasonable chance of success?

That depends on the course of the war, and it is hard to say in advance what might happen. But we can think through some scenarios. One scenario might look like this: If sanctions hurt hard enough, and the Ukrainian military holds out long enough, Putin may decide to shorten the war and only hold on to small portions of eastern Ukraine and Crimea and pull back from the rest. He will have proven his point about his ability to hold Ukraine hostage — indeed, hold European security hostage — and could likely count on the Ukrainian government being effectively cowed into submission for the foreseeable future. 

In that case, lasting peace may require Kyiv and its international backers to agree to some kind of permanent neutrality, as Finland and Austria agreed to after World War II. Ukraine’s president hinted at his willingness to consider such an outcome in the opening hours of the invasion. Neutrality would allow something like normal life to continue in Ukraine and reduce the likelihood of renewed fighting. It would also enable economic life to resume, along with international aid, investment, and development, helping Ukraine escape the trap of state failure and frozen conflicts. 

Here is another scenario: Russia seems to win a quick victory, then gets bogged down in an intractable insurgency in western Ukraine and in the big cities. The war drags on for years and destroys much of Ukrainian infrastructure and civic life, yet in the end the Russians are forced to withdraw, much as they were from Afghanistan in 1989. 

In that case, Ukraine would be whole, free, and seemingly at peace. It would also be shattered, impoverished, and dangerously prone to civil war between its pro-western half west of the Dnieper and its Russian-speaking population primarily on the east side.

In this scenario, justice and peace would require a much larger, longer, and more expensive international effort to bring Ukraine back into the family of nations. It would require billions in reconstruction and stabilization assistance, and possibly a U.N. monitoring mission to ensure Russia stays out and Ukrainians stay together. 

How do we relate to Russia after the war?

In either scenario, the hardest part of the question is how the world should relate to Russia after the war. Just war requires justice and peace for all combatants, not just the victor or the victim. How do we work toward justice and peace with Russia when its government has been guilty of one of the most flagrant, dangerous, and lethal acts of international aggression in generations? 

That will, again, depend on the manner of the war’s end and the Russian government’s behavior. Assuming Putin retains power and remains unrepentant, it is likely the United States and its allies will have to move toward something like the Cold War policy of containment. Keep sanctions in place, move to isolate and cut off Russia from the resources of the developed world, and work patiently — and peacefully, so far as possible — to limit and push back on Russian influence throughout the world. It will be a generational effort.

If Putin loses power — as Soviet leaders did in the aftermath of their defeat in Afghanistan — then the world has both greater opportunity and responsibility. The last time Russia went through a regime change, the world squandered the opportunity to help Russia transition to a more just, transparent, accountable regime that respects human rights and human dignity. Instead, Russia spent the 1990s deteriorating into a corrupt oligarchy, and the 2000s into a restored and rearmed authoritarian great power implacably opposed to the free world, all while the developed world took a holiday from history and lost two wars fighting terrorists in the Middle East and South Asia. 

We should not aim at violent regime change in Russia — the stakes of provoking a nuclear power are too great. But if Putin brings himself down through folly and overstretch — and videos of anti-war protests across Russia in the opening days of the invasion suggest Putin’s grip on power is not as solid as he wants the world to believe — we will face one of the best opportunities in 30 years to help a great power move — at last — toward greater justice and peace. It would be a herculean undertaking, but to fail again would invite catastrophe. 

4 reasons why Christians should care about what’s happening in Ukraine
By / Feb 25

On Thursday, Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine and launched attacks on cities and airports throughout the country, including near the capital, Kyiv. According to The New York Times, “​​Russian troops moved across the Ukrainian border in multiple areas at once, landing in the port city of Odessa in the south and crossing the eastern border into Kharkiv, the second largest city.” The attack sadly unfolded exactly in line with President Biden’s repeated, dire predictions. Putin, who wields the largest estimated nuclear stockpile in the world, threatened that nations “will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history” for interfering with his invasion.

Ukrainian forces are fighting back and have reportedly shot down six Russian fighters and a helicopter but in all likelihood are no match for the powerful Russian forces. Ukrainian President Zelensky announced that they “will give weapons to anyone who wants to defend the country” and urged his countrymen to “Be ready to support Ukraine in the squares of our cities.” Ukraine has a population of more than 44 million people, and panic swept over the country this morning as many could see and feel the impact of the initial attacks with runs on banks and gas stations being reported. Images of long lines of vehicles fleeing west have been widely seen. 

This is the largest ground invasion in Europe since World War II. More than 40 Ukrainian soldiers have already been killed with dozens more injured. Both figures are expected to rise. 

In addition to the senseless loss and destruction of human lives, there are multiple reasons why we should care about what’s happening between Ukraine and Russia. These reasons are grounded in geopolitical perspectives, humanitarian concerns, and biblical realities.

Ukraine is a sovereign country and a U.S. ally

One of the reasons why Russia’s illegal invasion is so important to pay attention to is because Ukraine is not only a sovereign country but also a democratic partner of the United States. Global leaders cannot invade other nations and claim territory without consequences. Ukraine not only has strategic importance to Europe, but also to the United States. Although Ukraine is not a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), it is aligned with the United States and other NATO nations in Eastern Europe. As former Ambassador to Ukraine William B. Taylor stated, “if Ukraine succeeds, we succeed. The relationship between the United States and Ukraine is key to our national security, and Americans should care about Ukraine.”

Putin plainly wants to undo the post-Cold War settlement, restore Russian arms and glory, and force the world to recognize Russia’s place as a global superpower on the international stage. This act of aggression and destabilization fundamentally shifts the previous world order and also further emboldens other authoritarian leaders to seize power around the world.

Cyber attacks could trigger Article 5 of NATO

Although President Biden has emphatically and repeatedly stated that U.S. troops will not be sent to Ukraine, it is possible that Putin will push his attack outside of Ukraine and into neighboring NATO nations. Article 5 of the NATO Charter states that “ . . . an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies.” NATO has added “cyber” to the definition of possible attacks that could trigger Article 5. 

While it is possible that Putin could attack a NATO nation through traditional means, it is thought to be more likely that cyberwarfare could be used. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has outlined two ways the U.S. could be drawn into the conflict through digital warfare: the deployment of cyber weapons in Ukraine that spread to neighboring NATO countries or retaliation against western sanctions through direct cyber attacks targeting key U.S. and NATO member-nation infrastructure.

Russia’s invasion could cause a refugee crisis in Central Europe

As the first attacks were waged in Ukraine, citizens quickly began to flee west, with many attempting to seek refuge in Poland. It has been reported that as many as 5 million people could be displaced as refugees by the war, creating the largest influx of refugees in Europe since the Syrian crisis in 2015. 

Poland has already begun preparing to receive these refugees by setting up hospitals and reception centers at its border. The Polish government has also announced that they will accept up to 1 million Ukrainian refugees if necessary. Other Central European nations have also pledged to host refugees and offer humanitarian aid as the situation unfolds, and the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) is calling on these governments to open their borders and has promised support for those that do. As the crisis continues and violence potentially spreads, Western Europe and the United States must also make preparations to open its doors to these vulnerable refugees. 

The Ukrainian Church

Ukraine is home to a vibrant Church and a number of missionaries. Joshua Tokar, director of English language services at Ukraine Evangelical Theological Seminary, noted, “Ukraine is the main missionary-sending country for Eastern Europe and Central Asia. The church is very strong. As far as Europe is concerned, the Ukrainian church is perhaps the strongest and is doing the most for education, training, and sending out workers.”

Many serving in Ukraine have made the difficult decision to relocate out of the country while others have chosen to remain. As Russia invades and potentially seeks a regime change, it is likely that these Christian brothers and sisters, as well as those of other religious minorities, will face intense persecution and human rights abuses. Those that have chosen to stay are committed to meeting the needs of their neighbors as they are able and have said, “When this is over, the citizens of Kyiv will remember how Christians have responded in their time of need.”

What’s next?

The European Union announced announced the strongest package of sanctions ever delivered by the coalition of nations against Russia. The United States had already sanctioned two Russian banks and the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline, and in an address to the nation today, President Biden, alongside the G7 leaders, announced additional, more severe sanctions on four more Russian banks and on some exports to Russia. It has also been reported that President Biden could consider massive cyberattacks against Russia for its actions, if provoked. The president had already repositioned thousands of troops in NATO countries in Eastern Europe and announced today the sending of additional troops to Germany and NATO’s Eastern Flank to bolster the alliance’s efforts.

Here in the United States, the crisis will continue to increase already high gas prices as Russia is the world’s second largest natural gas producer and third largest oil producer. Punchbowl news reported, “As of 5:30 this morning, the price of WTI crude oil was $100 per barrel, the highest it has been since 2014. The White House has said that it may release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help keep U.S. gas prices down.”

As Congress attempts to finalize and pass an omnibus spending bill funding the government for the remainder of the fiscal year ahead of the March 11 deadline, there will be growing pressure for the inclusion of additional defense and humanitarian aid in the spending package. 

A call to prayer

Ultimately, Christians should care about this because millions of image-bearers live in Ukraine. We should urgently cry out to God in prayer for the people of Ukraine. We’ve listed a few ways you can pray specifically below. And this guide from Send Relief has additional suggestions.

  • Pray that Christians and missionaries in Ukraine would hope in the Lord and that many would come to saving faith in Christ through their witness.
  • Pray for the safety of the citizens of Ukraine as war begins and that their lives would be honored and protected.
  • Pray that those fleeing the country and those who will be unable to return home will find a Christlike welcome and a home in a new nation.
  • Pray for President Biden and global leaders as they navigate geopolitical tensions and attempt to respond with wisdom and discernment.
  • Pray that Vladimir Putin’s heart would be changed and that he would withdraw from Ukraine and not pursue additional aggression.

In the midst of the darkness, may it be that the light of Christ brings hope and help through his people, his Word, and his mercy shown to a war-torn region.

Why is it so hard to have constructive conversations about abuse?
By / Feb 14

One obstacle to receiving care for current victims and survivors of past abuse is the tensions that emerge in the public discourse about abuse. While this obstacle exists in almost every setting, it is uniquely present within the church and Christian communities. 

Many factors contribute to the difficulty talking about abuse. In this article, we will look at two or three. If an obstacle you face is not discussed, please do not take that to mean the obstacle is not real. In a brief article, there is a limit to how much can be covered.

Questions framing the conversation

One challenge is that people often don’t start with the same question guiding the conversation. Two questions can frame conversations about responding to a report of abuse.

  1. How would I want an abuse claim handled if I were accused?
  2. How would I want an abuse claim handled if I were the person disclosing my abuse?

These questions lead conversations in different directions. 

  • Question one frames the conversation from the perspective of the accused. Therefore, it views the report as a potential threat. 
  • Question two frames the conversation from the perspective of a victim. Therefore, it views the report as a cry for help. 

When conversations devolve into arguments between leaders of an institution (such as a church) and victims or advocates, the difference in these two questions captures much of the tension.

For a variety of reasons, institutional leaders have far less fear of being the victim of abuse than being accused of abuse. A false accusation is how they could be most negatively affected by abuse. A false accusation would be damaging to their life, family, and vocation. They frame the conversation to try to ensure false accusations do not happen.

By contrast, victims, survivors, and advocates approach the subject of abuse with question two at the forefront of their minds. For them, the conversation is not based on what might happen. It is based on what has already happened in their life. Hence, they frame the conversation to try to ensure their experience is believed and doesn’t happen to anyone else.

The starting point for these two questions is so different that each side begins to view the other with suspicion as soon as the conversation begins. A debate emerges as each side tries to get the other side to start with their question. Whether these are public discourses in social media or private conversations about how an institution will be governed, these two questions result in what feels like an unnavigable impasse. 

When these two questions are put side by side, most people agree that question two is the proper starting point. I agree. We should prioritize the most vulnerable. If that position is taken, it also seems reasonable to most people to then ask, “If we prioritize the most vulnerable, how do we protect against damage from false accusations?” Being for question two doesn’t mean being against question one.

The legal system and the court of public opinion

This is where another dichotomy emerges. 

1. In the legal system, where “innocent until proven guilty” guides the process, the burden of proof is on the victim. Because abuse almost always occurs in private, this is a high bar to clear. It is exceedingly difficult for victims to establish their case by a legal standard. Even the more casual standard often used in the church of “giving the benefit of the doubt” favors the aggressor over the oppressed. The benefit of the doubt is given to the one accused (i.e., presumed innocence), not the one claiming to have been harmed (i.e., presumed truthfulness).

2. By contrast, in the court of public opinion, where people are strongly prone to interpret new claims based on a myriad of factors unrelated to evidence, confirmation bias dominates. There is a group that defaults to assuming the claim is true and a group that defaults to assuming the claim is false. We can usually identify these “teams” before a claim is presented.

The problem is, both systems are flawed; as any human system inevitably will be. In the legal system, “not guilty” verdicts don’t always mean “innocent.” Frequently, “not guilty” means there was not enough evidence to clear the threshold of establishing guilt or that too much time transpired for the legal complaint to remain valid. Many abusers have been declared “not guilty” because of a technicality. That does not make the initial claim false.

In the court of public opinion, far more people hear and give weight to the initial accusation than hear the outcome of an investigation (if one occurs) and change their opinion accordingly. The attention span of our modern culture means that accusations are headlines, and the results of investigations are too often back-page news. 

Here again, we see the tension between the two “sides” (I put sides in quotations because I wish this conversation was not as teamed as it has become). One side says, “Can’t you see how hard it is for those who have been abused to prove what happened and get any kind of justice? The person who has been abused is not usually the person who can afford the better attorney.” This is an important question that needs to be heard.

The other side replies, “Can’t you see that if falsely accused my reputation would be gone and the damage would be done long before the results of any investigation occurred? I don’t fear unnecessarily going to jail. I fear unnecessarily losing the ability to do what I love and feel called to do.” This is an understandable fear. We need to know the probability of the “if” to vet the concern properly.

This is the point in most articles where an author proposes to remedy the tension that has been defined. Some “third way” is articulated to avoid the weaknesses of the other two options. I’m afraid, at least to my awareness, there is no easy third way here. Even when we prioritize the vulnerable (as I believe we should), we will not make the uphill journey of abuse victims level ground. The difference between the legal system and the court of public opinion means that significant damage can be done to leaders who are proven innocent (not just “not guilty”).

Two proposals for these conversations

So, where do we go from here? I would make two proposals. 

First, we need to weigh the concern about false accusations of abuse against the prevalence of false claims. Where data can be found, we shouldn’t regulate our emotions based on hypotheticals. Reputable studies on this indicate that only between 2-7% of abuse claims are false. Further, those familiar with the process of investigating abuse claims indicate that false claims fall apart early in the investigative process. It is far more likely to have a true claim of abuse that is unprovable than a false claim that results in legal consequences.

This does not eliminate the concern of church leaders who fear they could lose their opportunity to do ministry based on a false accusation. For the 2-7% of individuals who are falsely accused, that is 100% of their experience and what determines their future. But we should also recognize that for the 93-98% of valid claims, their only hope for justice is if their claim is taken seriously. 

What does that mean? It means we should hear the person reporting abuse and care for them as if their report was true. We should take steps to ensure their safety. If what is being reported is criminal, we should trust the appropriate Romans 13:1-6 authority to vet the claim. The weight of the claim, not the role or reputation of the accused, should determine who vets the claim and how.

This isn’t declaring the accused “guilty.” It is deferring to the people God gave jurisdiction over criminal claims. As we ask people to trust church leadership to handle something well when God places that matter under our jurisdiction, we should trust the appropriate Romans 13 authority to handle well what God has placed under their jurisdiction. 

If we, as church leaders, are the accused we should cooperate with the appropriate legal process in the 2-7% of false claims for the sake of the 93-98% of victims that will not have access to care or justice if we do not. As a matter of faith in the biblical division of jurisdictions, we should trust that doing so will, in the end, increase (not decrease) our credibility. Those who abuse, protect their power; those who are true shepherds, prioritize protecting the vulnerable. 

Second, we need to “de-team” the conversation. As long as there are “sides” in this conversation, like political parties, mistrust will exacerbate the tensions described in this article. Pastors and church leaders must stop viewing victims and advocates as threats. We should repent whenever this posture is present. Those who have been abused are not “potential liabilities.” They are people, made in God’s image, who have been hurt and people for whom God intends the church to be a place of refuge.

As long as victims and advocates must demand to be heard a combative atmosphere will remain. That is not the fault of those who have not been heard. It is not the fault of social media, which has (sadly) done more to give survivors and advocates a voice than the church. 

In the same vein, the concerns of pastors and church leaders should not be dismissed as if these concerns are only an excuse for passivity and maintaining the status quo. Most of us, if we were faced with a choice that had a 7% chance of costing us our livelihood, would be hesitant to make that choice; especially if we did not understand the choice better than most ministry leaders understand the experience of abuse and the challenges of seeking justice after abuse.

If we are going to have a fruitful conversation about abuse, which is what I believe that most people who would take the time to read this article want, both question one and two, and the implications of the legal system and the court of public opinion must be taken into account. If either side dismisses the other, then trust will be broken, and the tone of an adversarial debate will reign over what must eventually become a hard-but-needed profitable conversation. 

If the debate remains adversarial, who loses? Answer: everyone, but especially current victims who are considering whether they can trust the church to help. If the concerns of the 2-7% reign over the concerns of the 93-98%, current victims realize the church is not prioritizing their care and safety. When this happens, the church is not the refuge for the vulnerable that God intends his church to be. 

How should Christians think about a boycott of the Olympics?
By / Feb 4

On Tuesday, the ERLC hosted a special online event called “Oppression & The Olympics: A Discussion of China’s Human Rights Atrocities Ahead of the Winter Games.” During their time together, three panelists discussed China’s many human rights violations and why the Beijing Olympics is an occasion to spotlight the need for accountability.

In light of the upcoming American coverage of the Olympics by NBC Universal, some have urged the public to not engage in watching the games because of the Chinese Communist Party’s ongoing human rights violations, in particular against the Uyghur ethnic minority. This raises the question of boycotts and how Christians should think about them. 

Thinking about boycotts

The term boycott refers to a refusal to buy, use, or participate in something as a means of expressing disapproval. A boycott can be either an act of protest or an act of coercion. In an act of protest, we are intentionally making purchasing decisions for the purpose of registering our disagreement or displeasure — regardless of whether it affects the behavior of anyone else. In contrast, an act of coercion is when we are intentionally making purchasing decisions for the primary purpose of changing someone else’s behavior.

In the case of the Olympics, we are either protesting or attempting to coerce a particular entity: either NBC Universal, the Chinese government, or both. We do not have a moral obligation to either watch the Olympics or buy products from China. The loss of one additional TV viewer or an individual consumer will also not cause much direct harm if we engage in a protest of refusing to watch the games or buy Chinese goods. We can merely make the decision to engage in such a protest based on our individual conscience without a concern about creating an moral conundrum.

However, if our goal is coercion, we are going beyond mere protest by attempting to wield our power in a way that brings about justice. Even though this is a nonviolent use of power, we should apply the similar principles and standards that we would use for violent use of power — which, for many Christians, would be just war principles.

Two principles associated with the just war tradition that would seem to apply to this situation are reasonable chance of success and discrimination. How those principles are applied is open to disagreement, of course, but here’s how we could frame the consideration. We can ask:

  1. Are our actions likely to have the intended effect on NBC Universal and the Chinese government, and
  2. Does the good of engaging in the boycott outweigh the economic destruction on innocent civilians, such as Chinese workers or employees of NBC?

How much economic harm should be allowed by our boycott depends on how likely our boycott is to lead to justice. If the boycott is likely to be effective, then a greater level of harm may be justifiable. However, if the boycott is likely to be ineffective, then the threshold for economic damage to innocents should be considerably less.

We can also be guided in our thinking about boycotts by the principle of proximate justice. As Steven Garber once explained the concept,

“Proximate justice realizes that something is better than nothing. It allows us to make peace with some justice, some mercy, all the while realizing that it will only be in the new heaven and new earth that we find all our longings finally fulfilled, that we will see all of God’s demands finally met. It is only then and there we will see all of the conditions for human flourishing finally in place, socially, economically, and politically.”

Here’s an example of how we might balance these factors in regard to our decision about a boycott:

  1. We can refuse to watch the Olympics on NBC since ​​viewership increases their advertising revenues. We can also refuse to buy any products made by slaves — which might include Olympic souvenirs — since this is the best way for me to apply proximate justice.
  2. However, we may decide we will not refuse to buy products merely because they are made in China since an individual boycott is almost assuredly going to be ineffective, and the most likely outcome would be that the only people hurt would not be the Chinese government but the poorest of Chinese workers (some of whom are our brothers and sisters in Christ).
  3. We can use what power we have to take other steps that are most likely to affect the Chinese government and minimize the harm to innocent Chinese people. For example, we can use social media to raise awareness about Chinese atrocities and the treatment of the Uyghurs while the Olympics is ongoing. 

Whatever choice we make about the boycott, there are certain actions we can all take to promote justice. As the panelists noted during the ERLC event, we can contact our U.S. representatives and senators and encourage them to enact legislation that limits Chinese government power. We can also pray for world leaders to have courage to put an end to the Uyghur genocide and to rethink economic exchange with a communist government that disregards human rights.