Tag Archives: Nonviolence

Can Christians Support and Participate in War?

ploughshare In 2005, my senior year at Wheaton College, in my ‘Christian Thought’ class, I participated in a debate on the topic: “Christians can Support and Participate in War.”

I was on the CON side, in line with my still being formed beliefs on what a Christian stance regarding war should be. I like resurrecting old writings and so I figured I’d share my opening statements from this debate I had in my college class. I’m not sure if I would hold so strongly to some of my points any more, but as this was a debate amongst Christians who believe the Bible is authoritative, I think these are still decent opening statements. I figure, as this Stories of Nonviolence series continues, there will inevitably be questions regarding the topic and I want to put this post as sort of the discussion point for the topic. Here are my opening lines:

Christian men and women, we have entered the battlefield. The true test has come: Will you follow the instructions of your commanding officer or act on your own judgment of the situation? It could be that from your view in the trenches His commands will result in the terrible death of many and even the triumph of the enemy over you. Will you, instead, respond in the way you discern is most in line with what He would have commanded if placed in your situation?

This debate is not a debate of effectiveness. It is irrelevant whether one side or the other would have been more or less effective of a response, whether in Nazi Germany or Saddam in Iraq. We must rest solely in the faith that following the commands of our God, who has revealed himself in Scripture, will result ultimately in the greatest good.

We believe that the scripture is inerrant and infallible; it is here that our debate lies. Whether His Word calls for us to take up arms is what we are here to debate, not whether this human action or that will result in the loss of less lives.

As Christians we are not to waver our beliefs based on the most current events. It is not because of Christianity’s rationality, reasonability and logical that we hold it to be true; we follow Scripture because we confess Christ as Lord.

Our Discussion is to be based on the Bible. “Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.” (Ecc. 12:13)

We also are not advocating that we do nothing. Pacifism does not equal passiveness. The same God that has told us to “love our enemies” has also told us to “do justly.” We hold each of those commands to be true and relevant, but we do not think they come in conflict with one another. We are here to say that war is not an option open to Christians. What options are open is extremely important, but it is not the discussion we are to have here. In fact, my earnest hope is that you will see what I believe to be true in the scripture, that is, that war is not an option, and will begin to think about and discuss what options there are.

We are in the trenches, and are loyalty is being tested. Do you believe that your commanding officer, the Sovereign God of the universe has in mind the best interest of you, your ally and your enemy? You would do good to follow His commands.

 

“For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength.” I Cor. 1:25

Stories of Nonviolence: A Soft Answer

I return this week to an individual story, this one has been around for a while, from Terry Dobson a fourth degree black belt:

 

The train clanked and rattled through the suburbs of Tokyo on a drowsy spring afternoon. Our car was comparatively empty – a few housewives with their kids in tow, some old folks going shopping. I gazed absently at the drab houses and dusty hedge rows.

At one station the doors opened, and suddenly the afternoon quiet was shattered by a man bellowing violent, incomprehensible curses. The man staggered into our car. He wore laborer’s clothing, and he was big, drunk, and dirty. Screaming, he swung at a woman holding a baby. The blow sent her spinning into the laps of an elderly couple. It was a miracle that the baby was unharmed.

Terrified, the couple jumped up and scrambled toward the other end of the car. The laborer aimed a kick at the retreating back of the old woman but missed as she scuttled to safety. This so enraged the drunk that he grabbed the metal pole in the center of the car and tried to wrench it out of its stanchion. I could see that one of his hands was cut and bleeding. The train lurched ahead, the passengers frozen with fear. I stood up.

I was young then, some 20 years ago, and in pretty good shape. I’d been putting in a solid eight hours of aikido training nearly every day for the past three years. I like to throw and grapple. I thought I was tough. Trouble was, my martial skill was untested in actual combat. As students of aikido, we were not allowed to fight.

"Aikido," my teacher had said again and again, "is the art of reconciliation. Whoever has the mind to fight has broken his connection with the universe. If you try to dominate people, you are already defeated. We study how to resolve conflict, not how to start it."

I listened to his words. I tried hard I even went so far as to cross the street to avoid the chimpira, the pinball punks who lounged around the train stations. My forbearance exalted me. I felt both tough and holy. In my heart, however, I wanted an absolutely legitimate opportunity whereby I might save the innocent by destroying the guilty.

This is it! I said to myself, getting to my feet. People are in danger and if I don’t do something fast, they will probably get hurt.

Seeing me stand up, the drunk recognized a chance to focus his rage. "Aha!" He roared. "A foreigner! You need a lesson in Japanese manners!"

I held on lightly to the commuter strap overhead and gave him a slow look of disgust and dismissal. I planned to take this turkey apart, but he had to make the first move. I wanted him mad, so I pursed my lips and blew him an insolent kiss.

"All right! He hollered. "You’re gonna get a lesson." He gathered himself for a rush at me. A split second before he could move, someone shouted "Hey!" It was earsplitting. I remember the strangely joyous, lilting quality of it – as though you and a friend had been searching diligently for something, and he suddenly stumbled upon it. "Hey!"

I wheeled to my left; the drunk spun to his right. We both stared down at a little old Japanese. He must have been well into his seventies, this tiny gentleman, sitting there immaculate in his kimono. He took no notice of me, but beamed delightedly at the laborer, as though he had a most important, most welcome secret to share.

"C’mere," the old man said in an easy vernacular, beckoning to the drunk. "C’mere and talk with me." He waved his hand lightly. The big man followed, as if on a string. He planted his feet belligerently in front of the old gentleman, and roared above the clacking wheels, "Why the hell should I talk to you?" The drunk now had his back to me. If his elbow moved so much as a millimeter, I’d drop him in his socks.

The old man continued to beam at the laborer.

"What’cha been drinkin’?" he asked, his eyes sparkling with interest. "I been drinkin’ sake," the laborer bellowed back, "and it’s none of your business!" Flecks of spittle spattered the old man.

"Ok, that’s wonderful," the old man said, "absolutely wonderful! You see, I love sake too. Every night, me and my wife (she’s 76, you know), we warm up a little bottle of sake and take it out into the garden, and we sit on an old wooden bench. We watch the sun go down, and we look to see how our persimmon tree is doing. My great-grandfather planted that tree, and we worry about whether it will recover from those ice storms we had last winter. Our tree had done better than I expected, though especially when you consider the poor quality of the soil. It is gratifying to watch when we take our sake and go out to enjoy the evening – even when it rains!" He looked up at the laborer, eyes twinkling.

As he struggled to follow the old man’s conversation, the drunk’s face began to soften. His fists slowly unclenched. "Yeah," he said. "I love persimmons too…" His voice trailed off.

"Yes," said the old man, smiling, "and I’m sure you have a wonderful wife."

"No," replied the laborer. "My wife died." Very gently, swaying with the motion of the train, the big man began to sob. "I don’t got no wife, I don’t got no home, I don’t got no job. I am so ashamed of myself." Tears rolled dow n his cheeks; a spasm of despair rippled through his body.

Now it was my turn. Standing there in well-scrubbed youthful innocence, my make-this-world-safe-for-democracy righteousness, I suddenly felt dirtier than he was.

Then the train arrived at my stop. As the doors opened, I heard the old man cluck sympathetically. "My, my," he said, "that is a difficult predicament, indeed. Sit down here and tell me about it."

I turned my head for one last look. The laborer was sprawled on the seat, his head in the old man’s lap. The old man was softly stroking the filthy, matted hair.

As the train pulled away, I sat down on a bench. What I had wanted to do with muscle had been accomplished with kind words. I had just seen aikido tried in combat, and the essence of it was love. I would have to practice the art with an entirely different spirit. It would be a long time before I could speak about the resolution of conflict.

 

By Terry Dobson, from What Would You Do?

Story of Nonviolence: Resisting the Nazis

Nazi Postcard (Front) by PUL.Nazi Germany is often mentioned when I have conversations regarding nonviolence, particularly related to it on the international level regarding war. I’m going to again quote The Powers That Be, by Walter Wink, at length. This is a great and brief summary of the nonviolent action that effectively resisted the Nazis:

The brutalities of the Nazis stand for many people as the ultimate refutation of nonviolence. Surely, they reason, only violence could have stopped Hitler. The facts indicate just the opposite. Nonviolence did work whenever it was tried against the Nazis. Bulgaria’s Orthodox Biship Kiril told Nazi authorities that if they attempted to deport Bulgarian Jews to concentration camps, he himself would lead a campaign of civil disobedience, lying down on the railroad tracks in front of the trains. Thousands of Bulgarian Jews and non-Jews resisted all collaboration with Nazi decrees. They marched in mass street demonstrations and sent a flood of letters and telegrams to authorities protesting all anti-Jewish measures. Bulgarian clergy and laity hid Jews. Christian ministers accepted large numbers of Jewish “converts”, making it clear that this was a trick to evade arrest and that they would not consider the vows binding. Ron Sider and Richard K. Talor comment, “Because of these and other nonmilitary measures, all of Bulgaria’s Jewish citizens were saved from the Nazi death camps.”

Finland saved all but six of its Jewish citizens from death camps through nonmilitary means. Of 7,000 Danish Jews, 6,500 escaped to Sweden, aided by virtually the entire population and tips from within the German occupation force itself. Almost all the rest were hidden safely for the balance of the war. Denmark’s resistance was so effective that Adolf Eichmann had to admit that the action against the Jews of Denmark had been a failure.

The Norwegian underground helped spirit 900 Jews to safety in Sweden, but another 756 were killed, all but 20 in Nazi death camps. German wives of Jews demonstrated in Berlin on behalf of their husbands in the midst of war, and secured their release for its duration. In Italy, a large percentage of Jews survived because officials and citizens sabotaged efforts to them over to the Germans.

During the Nazi occupation of Holland, a general strike by all rail workers practically paralyzed traffic from November 1944 until liberation in May 1945–this despite extreme privation to the people, who held out all winter without heat and with dwindling food supplies. Similar resistance in Norway prevented Vidkun Quisling, Hitler’s representative, from imposing a fascist “corporative state” on the country.

The tragedy is that even though nonviolence did work when used against the Nazis, it was used too seldom. The Jews themselves did not use it, but continued to rely in the main on the passive nonresistance that had carried them through so many pogroms in the past. And the churches as a whole were too docile or anti-Semitic, and too ignorant of the nonviolent message of the gospel, to act effectively to resist the Nazis. –The Powers That Be, Walter Wink, p.151-153

[photo credit] [quote typing credit]

Moral Jesus: Rejecting Violence in All Its Forms

“Though most religions shun warfare and hold nonviolence as the only moral route toward political change, religion and its language have been co-opted by the violent people who govern societies. If someone were to come along who would not compromise, a rebel who insisted on taking the only moral path, rejecting violence in all of its forms, such a person would seem so menacing that he would have to be killed, and after his death he would be canonized or deified, because a saint is less dangerous than a rebel. This has happened numerous times, but the first prominent example was a Jew named Jesus.”

— Mark Kurlansky. 2006. ‘Nonviolence: Twenty-five lessons from the history of a Dangerous idea’

Nonviolence: 25 Lessons from the History of a Dangerous Idea (Modern Library Chronicles)I just finished this book recently, which I would highly recommend, and was struck by this statement. Rob Bell actually mentioned it in a sermon he preached at Mars Hill about being Peacemakers. I think we miss seeing Jesus in this way, and I found Mark’s words extremely profound and challenging.

The point is that, though most religions teach the danger of violence and lay out a moral path, few if any are willing to follow that path in all of its implications. Jesus was a Moral man, thus a rebel. Isn’t that interesting? We live in a society and a world, and many believe in religions, that esteem values and morals that we choose not to live up too. I’m not just talking about Christians, I think every single one of us, if we are honest with ourselves recognize that we are hypocrites. I think every parent has probably come to a point were they acknowledge they are trying to teach their children values they know are right, but they themselves do not even live up to, even more they choose not to live up to those values at times.
And so Jesus is a radical, he is a rebel. In a society that says one thing and does another, a person who would have the audacity to actually follow through and live out his beliefs must be killed and hidden. Jesus has been hidden, his radical life has been hidden in our deification of him. Regardless of whether you believe Jesus Christ is a deity or not, at the least we need to recognize that his life was far more rebellious then we acknowledge.