Is pacifism on the rebound within churches of Christ? It certainly seems so to me. Just as the period between World War I and World War II saw a return to pacifism, so I think cultural conditions in recent years have allowed for a similar rise.
Barring an actual enemy invasion of U.S. territory, I think that pacifism can only grow within our brotherhood here in the U.S. The generation most vehemently opposed to pacifism is the World War II generation, followed closely by their children.
I want to spend some time exploring some topics related to pacifism and violence/non-violence. Some will tire of this discussion, and that’s fine. I long ago gave up any illusions of writing a wildly popular blog. I’m well aware that there is lots of reading material out there on the Internet, so if someone wishes for a change of topic, they will have more than ample opportunity to find something. If nothing else, just follow some of the links on the right side of this page.
But writing these things out helps me to think them through. And the response I get often steers me back on course when I opt for a disastrous path. So I’ll be thinking out loud for a bit.
i am definitely opposed to the goofy black hats worn by the soldiers in the foto
Brian,
I’m guessing you were never in marching band…
I look forward to the discussion as the CofC focused a lot of attention on it at one time in our history. This has been an issue I have struggled with – in the sense of where I stand on the issue, not that I ever found myself in a position of pointing a weapon at someone – since I was 18 years old. I never heard of the CofC having a pacifist side until college at ACU and there was a only a tiny minority of students that had ever considered the perspective. My grandfather was a pacifist in the Lipscomb tradition and I never heard of that bit of news until I was about 20. So it will be interesting to see where this discussion goes.
Is Pacifism on the rise in the CoC? I can’t answer that question but I can tell you that when I began my undergraduate studies in Bible at Harding University (at the age of 25), I was not opposed to any sort of military violence. When 9/11 occurred, I was in full support of a military response. I was also supportive when the war in Iraq began. But then shortly after something happened. I had already undergone a major paradigm shift theologically and hermeneutically. No longer did I believe the goal of being a Christian was to restore a primitive pattern of the church that supposedly existed in the pages of the New Testament. I now believed that the goal of being a Christian was to follow Jesus by living life as he did, with his values and aspirations. Then I checked out of the library a book “The Politics of Jesus” by John Howard Yoder. While some of it was difficult to understand at the time, it planted seeds that were watered and brought to harvest by Lee Camp’s book “Mere Discipleship” (which presented a more accessible Yoderian understanding of Jesus’ message). That is when I became a pacifist and even though I have many questions, I still am one to this day.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
I am an enigmatic, ambivalent pacificist. I think I always have been. I have never been one who could aim and shoot a gun at a human target, but I am extremely thankful that there are Christians who can. Yes, Christians.
Because while I don’t see Jesus mowing down mortal enemies with an AK-47, I also don’t hear him telling the centurion to quit his job and go feed the poor instead. For cryin’ out loud, the centurion built a synagogue, right (Luke 7)?
If I had been drafted and sent to Viet Nam, I would have been of best use to my country as a casualty statistic. I wouldn’t have gone to Canada, but I couldn’t have served. I’d have had to file “C.O.” Yet I am in debt to uncountable warriors who could and did, and legions who died on any number of battlefields. I have nothing but admiration and gratitude for them. (Okay, maybe a little envy for their clearness of conscience.)
I couldn’t have done it. Wasn’t reared that way. Didn’t see things that way. Still don’t.
War is bad. It should not happen. As long as it does, innocent citizens benefit from the courage, capability and willingness of the soldier. And I have to say that we need more Christians among them, so that the demons of war don’t burrow into the brains of the brave and yield abominations like Abu Grahib.
When I hear the word pacifist – I conjure up a Amish type people. The kind who work quietly on their farms, milk a cow or two and go to bed when the sun goes down. Though this is not quite right – that is how my mind sees the thing. I am not aware of a pacifist type movement in the church. I met many believers whose politics are anything but pacifying. Why mention politics, because one can see in a man the fears and hatred against the political leaders of the day instead of praying for the nations leaders. And I find it anything but pacifying.
Politics aside, if talking about what the church’s role is I find it most believe it should very proactive in being a light in the community and supporting those who are in need in the church. The concern is how one removes a nationalistic fever and replace it with a discerning faith or let’s say how not to make a faith into a nationalist attitude. I do not think pacifism – if it is a movement – is quite the answer. Yes, Jesus did say blessed are the peacekeepers, he did not say blessed are those who pacify. We are a people of action. It’s just our action is not of this world or this nation or any nation. Are action is from the living God and the risen savior.
The Lord did not need to tell the centurion that he needed to quit the military. The teaching of John to the soldiers had already told them, “Do violence to no man” (Luke 3:14). Jesus had just taught, possibly in the hearing of this centurion, doctrine that would have required him to give up his post if he truly believed it (Luke 6:27-36). As far as the centurion building a synagogue I have known many people who did good deeds to salve their conscience because of the evil they had done.
I would like to believe that the church of Christ is returning to its pacifistic roots, but I am a little shaken in that belief when I see some congregations of the church honoring veterans because of their military service. I can not understand how there is any honor in taking the lives of other human beings. On the other hand, it is possible that this attitude, along with the atrocities which are a natural outgrowth of the “might makes right” philosophy of the military, may spur a renewal of pacifism.
I did register as a conscientious objector during the Viet Nam War and was told that I objected to too much because I refused to take even a civilian job that would support the war. The draft board then threatened me with prison. I did not go to Canada and did not intend to even if it meant prison. The Lord did not see fit to allow me to be imprisoned. The draft board decided that it did not want to generate more problems than it already had. I was classified 4-D even though I was only preaching part time and had not yet entered Freed-Hardeman as a Bible student.
Pacifism is a spiritual necessity if we are followers of Jesus and citizens of the Kingdom of God. This requires peace with God, peace within ourselves, and peace with other human beings. It requires not only that we do no violence, but that we do not support any those who use violence.
War is not just bad. War is evil (James 4:1-10). There will always be wars, but there is no right side in any war. Both sides commit sin by their actions.
I do not owe my peace or freedom to any soldier other than soldiers of Christ whose weapons are not carnal (2 Corinthians 10:4). My peace and freedom come from the sacrifice of Jesus Christ the son of God who was crucified by Roman soldiers, at the biding of two man made governments.
I am happy to be a citizen of the kingdom of Heaven which serves only the Lord Jesus.
May you be at peace always,
Wes
“As far as the centurion building a synagogue I have known many people who did good deeds to salve their conscience because of the evil they had done.” All due respect, Wes, that’s assuming more than we’re told of him, I think.
Frequently, deterrence is the only role that a soldier need serve. Though in a whole different context John Milton pointed out “They also serve who only stand and wait,” I think the point is applicable to the soldier’s role in serving as a deterrent. Many have served and served well in that role; my dad among them in World War II. Never made it past training camp in Texas.
My feeling is that there is room for both points of view within the Christian faith, and I continue to believe that if more Christians served in the military, fewer of the atrocities springing from “might makes right” would occur – because believers know that only God makes right.
War is bad and evil – but let’s remember that those addressed in James’ epistle were believers, apparently fighting among themselves.
Keith,
Are you saying that James 4 refers to actual warfare between believers? I’ve never heard that interpretation of that passage.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Is there any point in James’ writing where he is no longer addressing “brothers and sisters” among “the twelve tribes scattered”?
Don’t most of the newer translations render the words “fights and quarrels” less expansively than the KJV’s “wars and fightings”? (Sometimes a writer’s exaggeration is to emphasize the severity of the transgression; embarrass the sinner.)
Keith,
I’ve never viewed James as discussing actual physical fighting among Christians. I’m not saying you’re wrong; it’s just a new concept to me.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Actually, I’m not trying to suggest that James is talking about physical fighting among Christians, but their quarreling is just as inexcusable.
“War” and “kill” would be understood as exaggeration the same way that “a man who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” What happens in the heart or by word of mouth or through fisticuffs or through megatons is all unacceptable to God among believers; they are not to have hatred toward one another. This passage says nothing – as nearly as I can tell – about international relations except to describe how conflicts usually begin: with selfish desires.
I don’t see it prohibiting someone from serving in the military; it might prevent one from serving as a combatant if the reason for serving is selfish, hateful, cruel.
Who says James was only writing to Christians? At the time the letter was written, the wall between synagogue and church was still being built, wasn’t it?
If Acts 7 is any indicator, there were definite “wars and fightings” between brethren “among the twelve tribes scattered” at the time James wrote. And since his letter is basically an exposition of the SoM, which was Jesus’ reorientation of Torah and Wisdom around himself, I see it having great application in the synagogue as well.
James 2:1, 5:7 and a few other verses lead me to believe that the primary audience, at least, was the fellowship of believers, Nick. what leads you to believe otherwise?
The opening credits, mostly. Oh, I agree that believers were the primary audience – but the wall wasn’t high enough yet, I don’t think, that such writings wouldn’t have circulated both ways. I think men like James and Paul saw themselves as being faithful Jews, and as such they had a responsibility to teach their “brothers of the twelve tribes scattered,” whether they were Gentile or Jewish.
Pingback: THE CHRISTIAN AND PACIFISM « Committed To Truth