The Niebuhr brothers’ (H. Richard & Reinhold) dueling articles concerning the “how” and “what” inherent to the Christian question regarding the need to deal redemptively with sinful nations or individuals presents the discerning reader with a very clear choice. Christians, on one hand, can do nothing (save the act of non-involvement itself and repentance for personal and corporate sin) and thus be sure that their own impure motives do not complicate the situation further (H. Richard); on the other hand, one can admit the tragedy that is life and one’s own place within the tragedy (sin), and act righteously for change (involvement) in spite of it all (Reinhold). The choice between the two acts is clear, and articulated very, very well by both of their theological/philosophical representatives (H. Richard & Reinhold). It also greatly affects a Christian’s choice between ideological positions re: redemptive involvement and/or non-involvement, i.e., pacifism and/or realism (for lack of a better word). Which will you choose? Me? I’ll camp with those dedicated to non-violent redemptive processes, and only after much, much thought on the matter. The Gospel of Jesus Christ calls for it.