Friday, 11 December 2009
-
Should Christians Join the Military or Police?
Should Christians be in the military or police force? What about the positions within those organizations that do not require violent activity? -Trunthepaige and othersAnswer:
Provided by Theophilus166This is a difficult question, and a personal one for those of us who have friends in our churches who in the military. Probably the most relevant scripture is in Romans 13.“Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”
It is important, however, to remember that at the end of Romans 12, leading into this passage, is an exhortation to love our enemies, and do good rather and evil to our enemies. This is the behavior that is acceptable for followers of Christ.
In Romans 13, it is with the assumption that followers of Christ are not in the military that Paul speaks of the military as one of God’s instruments of justice. It is impossible to draw a direct correlation between military service in Paul’s day, and to our own. Military service meant acknowledgement of the legion’s pagan god, which was obviously not permissible for Christians. For them, the issue was not only violence, but worship of pagan gods.
Thus, in Romans 12, we have instructions for Christians. In Romans 13, we have instructions for Christian interaction with an explicitly non-Christian government and military. As Christians, our primary allegiance lies with Jesus, His teachings, and His Kingdom. Any other allegiance must submit to our allegiance to Christ. If Christ commands us to love our enemies (which I believe has clearly been established in scripture and throughout the XCCP blog), we are obligated to do so regardless of any national commitments to do otherwise. While our nation may consider it honorable to fight for the lives of those around us, the example and teaching given to us by Jesus is to lay down our lives peacefully. Nowhere in the teachings of Christ are we encouraged to use violence for even the greatest causes. We are called to live by God's means, and trust God with the end result.
To answer the second part of the question, I believe it would be difficult for a Christian to have non-violent roles in explicitly violent organizations. If I support someone committing armed robbery, I am guilty of being an accomplice even if I just drive a car. If someone wrongs me, and I give someone else a weapon in order to hurt the person who wronged me, I am not acting in love towards my enemy.
We cannot separate our own role from the vision of the company we work for. I could not, in good conscience, be in charge of travel arrangements for a doctor who is traveling to abort babies – even if my direct responsibility isn’t inherently sinful. In the same way, I cannot support an organization that behaves in a way that I believe is clearly against the teachings of Jesus.
While I believe our military and police force often have noble goals (protecting the innocent, preventing genocide, etc.), they use means that I simply cannot justify as a follower of Christ. I cannot kill those that I’m called to love, no matter how grievous their offenses, or how much threat they pose to me or my family. Violence is simply not a tool at our disposal as Christians, whether personally or nationally.
Do you believe Christians can remain true to their values, morals and virtues while serving in the military or police force?
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: XCCP@xanga
- Name: The XCCP
- About Me: We are a group of Xangans who are dedicated to informing others about Christian Pacifism through healthy discussion.
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 0 3 Views: 0 2196 Comments: 0 102 View all posts by XCCP@xanga
Comments (34)
Only if they join the Swiss Guard. That way they can wear those nifty uniforms designed by Michaelangelo and carry pikes. Hooray for pikes!
Is this a serious question? God laid down rules and regulations in the Old Testament for military service. As for working in the police force, I think people are exaggerating what it is police officers actually do. I come from a family of policemen and while drunken scuffles happen occasionally, extreme violence is very rare. Most police officers never have to pull their gun out outside of training much less fire it. I would think that you would want people of your same religion in these positions of power.
I don't disagree with pacifism; I just don't think it has a practical application. We'll balance each other out though. You can contribute to peace in the world through pacifism and I'll save your ass when the violent person you fail to convert decides to start a war with you.
@Demetrios_of_Phaleron@xanga - Oh, the Swiss Guard...the one group of people you want to laugh at...the one group of people that could kill you with one finger for laughing at them.
Um, yes. If God is calling someone to serve their city or country in that field, that's between themselves and God.
@snarkius@xanga - It is definitely a serious question, and not an uncommon one in Christian ethics. Your position is both common and sensible, but very few Christians living within 300 years of Jesus would think it was acceptable. On the basic reasoning behind Christian nonviolence, we put together a fairly comprehensive post here.
@Amyseen@xanga - Well, and the church. We have to old each other accountable.
@snarkius@xanga - Well said! My sentiments exactly.
I have a question for Chistian Pacifists, or just Pacifists in general. Do you believe in the right to intervene in the Defense of Others? Or even Defense of yourself? Cause what I'm getting from this post is if I, as a Cop and an Armed Forces member. (Guess I'm doubly screwed) intervened on your behalf when someone was bashing in your face, Invading your home, or invading your country. I would be condemned!
"To answer the second part of the question, I believe it would be difficult for a Christian to have non-violent roles in explicitly violent organizations. If I support someone committing armed robbery, I am guilty of being an accomplice even if I just drive a car. If someone wrongs me, and I give someone else a weapon in order to hurt the person who wronged me, I am not acting in love towards my enemy.
We cannot separate our own role from the vision of the company we work for. I could not, in good conscience, be in charge of travel arrangements for a doctor who is traveling to abort babies – even if my direct responsibility isn’t inherently sinful. In the same way, I cannot support an organization that behaves in a way that I believe is clearly against the teachings of Jesus."
@SirNickDon@xanga - Good point. Your link makes more sense than the post above. My wording was harsh but most posts titled "Should Christians...?" put me on the defensive while I read the posts because a lot of them-though not this one-tend to be a bit one-sided. Though the title should attract people like me who get on the defensive so we can get some healthy debate going on.
I can see both sides of the pacifism issue. If a foreign army was occupying a nation I can see that accepting a bit of browbeating would be a better alternative than fighting back and possibly causing retaliation on your town or family. However, I can also see fighting the army in the first place in hopes of keeping the army from invading any further and disrupting more towns.
I have always interpreted those Roman passages as allowing for self-defense. I don't think that we should strike back because 'he struck me so he deserves it.' That is better left for God. I do think there is a difference between taking revenge and taking defensive action so the offensive act doesn't happen in the first place.
@snarkius@xanga - Yeah, these XCCP posts aren't really designed to be featured publicly. They were originally intended to be a sort of in-house debate amongst a group of Christians who are all pacifists, but nonetheless bring different perspectives to questions like these. Some, for instance, approve of non-combat military service, others not even of working in non-military CO camps. Featuring it on Revelife and titling it this way will definitely bring a wide array of dissenters, you're right.
No, unfortunately. You can't just decide that you don't like something in your faith so if you do it anyway but for a reason that you deem as being a good reason then it is suddenly okay if your faith says that it isn't under any circumstances.
However, I am still glad that Christians are in the military and police force. Mostly because the wide majority of people in the US consider themselves Christians and we might not always have much of a police force or military force if they decided not to do these things.
Then again, I don't really consider myself Christian, so I guess that's why I can think this way? :p
This is a challenging post. Very challenging.
I agree with just about everything you said on here-- problem is I can also sympathize with the arguments on the other side.
Use of force... even commandments of use of force by God Himself through His prophets are found all over the Old Testament. Jesus our Lord, even, will return with "an Iron Scepter".
At any rate I will say this; being a soldier would be very difficult for me.
However, for Cops, I would not have as much trouble. I've known a lot of Police throughout time and none of them have ever shot anyone. They may have had to wrestle someone to the ground, but they've never killed anyone.
So, Soldier-- difficult; even though I respect and am thankful for the freedoms afforded to me at their sacrifice.
Cop-- I would not have a problem with that.
Here's an additional question-- taking your logic of the person who enables the sin being equally guilty.... what about us regular, supposedly "non-violent" citizens? We pay taxes that buy the guys that fire the bullets that kill the enemy... and at the very least, we vote the politicians in that decide which wars for us to fight?
Do you think there is any responsibility on our shoulders for that?
@PKforchrist@xanga - "The only right Christians have is to give up their rights." - Oswald Chambers
A cheap shot, I admit. But it underscores an important difference between most Christian pacifists and most Christian non-pacifists.
To address your question more generally, there's no way I can answer on behalf of pacifists in general. Yoder catalogued no less than 27 versions of Christian pacifisms in his study Nevertheless: The Varieties and Shortcomings of Religious Pacifism, and I am sure there are many more. If you want a range of opinions just here on Xanga, check out the XCCP, where we mostly agree, but disagree on many sub-issues, such as whether or not it is acceptable for pacifists to accept police protection.
Personally, I can definitely see a case for those in the police/military justifying their actions as Christian, but I do believe the more you meditate on what it means to be part of a community called to the imitation of Jesus, the more problematic that should become for you. In any event, there's no need for us to excommunicate one another, but plenty of dialogue is needed, especially between upholders of just-war tradition, which is too often taken to mean "whatever my country says to do is therefore just."
John 15:13 "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends"
If this doesn't say Military and Police to you then you have no idea what you are talking about. Men and women don't join the military and police to fight they join to help others in need and to stand by the men and women beside them and protect them in times of need.
When I attended college at Texas A&M University (Texas Aggie Band-B-Battery Class of 1995) there was a story told of a soldier in WWII. His friend was wounded in no mans land *between the trenches*. He requested from her sergeant to go out and get his friend and was told no. Ignoring his sergeant he went out into no mans land and got his friend and was shot up pretty bad on the way back. He sergeant told him see you are going to die and for what your friend is dead and now you will be, too. And the man said, but he is my friend and I couldn't leave him out there alone. Point to the story Aggies don't leave a man behind. My point is military people are not fighting for political ideals or power. They fight for the men and women at their sides. They fight so that they can get home to their love ones. If a Christian loves others like they say that do, then they would want to be there to protect them and keep them safe or at the very least get them back home to the ones who love them. Isn't that would Jesus would do?FYI- I am a former Catholic *even a Vatican Certified CCD or Confraternity of Christian Doctrine teacher* but now I am a Spiritual Agnostic.
@SirNickDon@xanga - Like I said, "If God is calling." He very likely could be calling some to such service. I know he is always encouraging and always loving and always doing something new, so I still believe it's between a person and God. Besides, if someone chooses either of these fields as a personal act of worship, I don't think this would be contrary to the church anyways..? Your response puzzles me.
I think every Christian is different, so some can. I believe others shouldn't, if their own personal values will get in the way of the duty of their job. Same with doctors, pharmacists...
@suggestivereligion - I agree
Who better to liberate the oppressed, who better to protect and serve than the Christian who was reborn to do exactly that?
I think it would be extremely difficult to be a Christian and perform military service. I don't think it impossible but it'd probably be about as hard as getting a camel through the eye of a needle. It's probably hard to be a peacemaker and fighting in a war at the same time. It's probably hard to love enemies when you're being taught to defeat them with violence and threats of violence. Though I'm sure there are a few nonviolent positions within the military in which a Christian can be light in darkness. Even then, I wouldn't recommend anyone attempt such an endeavor without a direct calling from the Father and confirmation from saints.
Here are a few fun quotes I attached to the original post (which as SirNickDon stated, was meant as a more in-house discussion).
“If everyone were to act the same as you [Christians], the national government would soon be left utterly deserted and without any help, and affairs on earth would soon pass into the hands of the most savage and wretched barbarians.”
Celus next exhorts us to help the Emperor and be his fellow soldiers. To this we reply, “You cannot demand military service of Christians any more than you can of priests.” We do not go forth as soldiers with the Emperor even if he demands this, but we do fight for him by forming our own army, an army of faith through our prayers to G-d.-Origen, Against Celsusm Celsus against the Christians, VIII. 68. 73.
The new ones to be accepted are questioned by the teachers about the reason for their decision before they hear the Word. Those who bring them shall say whether they are ready for it and what their situation is… Whoever has a demon needs purification before he takes part in the instruction. The professions and trades of those who are going to be accepted into the community must be examined. The nature and type of each must be established… A charioteer, an athlete, a gladiator, atrainer of gladiators, or one who fights wild beasts or hunts them or holds public office at the circus games shall give it up or be rejected. A pagan priest or guardian of idols shall give it up or be rejected. A military constable must be forbidden to kill. If he is commanded to kill in the course of his duty, he must not take this upon himself, neither may he swear; if he is not willing to follow these instructions, he must be rejected. A proconsul or a civic magistrate who wears the purple and governs by the sword, shall give it up or be rejected.
-Hippolytus, Church Order in The Apostolic Tradition 16; ca. A.D. 218.
The divine banner and the human banner do not go together, nor the standard of Christ and the standard of the Devil. Only without the sword can the Christian wage war: The Lord has abolished the sword.
-Tertullian, On Idolatry 19; On the Chaplet 11-12.
God has angels to serve as messengers, and his own military force. I believe he has no problem with a human police/military force, as long as they fight with honor
I believe that some Christians were intended to be in the military. As of now, there are undoubtedly Christian's in the military. Their role may not be to necessarily violently attack the one's who US seem to find as the enemy, but to help those in the Military. Surely, Christians may be there to keep accountable and reassurance in our Brothers and Sisters of their faith while serving in the Military. This may start from simply talking to someone, or to sharing the Gospel to non-believers. You never know. Only God knows why some Christians are brought into the military. To sum it up, one cannot assume that Christians who join the military have intentions to kill, but maybe for other reasons irrelevant to violence.
As I pursue on in the Marine Corps, I believe that God intended me to be there for those who are in need in many ways. To be honest, my intention is not to kill or to receive that pride of being a Marine Corps Officer. I believe that God brought me there to assist those who are in need, to lead my Marines to safety if need be deployment, not to fight the ones who we are suppose to love. I am not being one sided, I completely understand the pov you are coming from. It is something that I've thought before joining the USMC. But if you really think about it, it is really comforting that God has our fellow Brothers and Sisters of Christ out there helping those who are really in need, especially in times of war.
Why is violence considered evil? Didn't God command his people to commit a good deal of it in the old testament? What about the whip of thorns or the command to sell your cloak and buy a sword? What about all the talk of blood of the unfaithful that the lamb will shed in Revelation?
If you say that violence is evil, then are you not saying that God commanded his people to commit evil acts?
@MusicologyNut85@xanga - Great point! I find the idea that violence in all forms is "evil" is absurd.
@MusicologyNut85@xanga - @MC_Shann@xanga - As an adherent to "Christian nonviolence" myself, I absolutely agree. Anyone who tries to paint the use of force as evil is mischaracterizing the whole idea of christological pacifism, and is probably more interested in pacifism as a liberal philosophy in its own right than they are in discerning what it means to follow Jesus.
Like most things, the use of force is right or wrong dependent on context, and there are both virtuous and cowardly acts of violence.
Christological pacifists like myself (and the OP) do not believe that Christians should avoid the use of force because the use of force is evil per se, but because it is incompatible with the lifestyle the church is called to. It is not a matter of avoiding dirty violence, but of being formed into a community capable of loving its enemies, even the national ones, of speaking only the truth in love (Christians should make awful spies, you know), of not swearing oaths (which in itself makes military service problematic), etc. The church is to become an alternative polis to the politics of the world, witnessing as it does the reality of Christ's kingdom. That doesn't mean that violence is evil, but it does mean we are called to live differently than the world.
John Howard Yoder wrote that police service is certainly not an evil, but serves a different function than the one we know that every Christian is called to. Every Christian is called to be a minister of reconciliation, Yoder says, citing 2 Corinthians 5, but scripture tells us that the state is God's minister for wrath (he cites Romans 13, of course). That is noble, not evil, but is a Christian ever called to exercise God's wrath? It is very difficult to read the New Testament and come away thinking that that's within our task. Yoder says, "If a brother feels such an individual calling, let him bring his case before the whole of the church."
@MusicologyNut85@xanga - I think you may be misremembering the "whip of thorns," if you mean the one Jesus fashioned before clearing the temple, which is mentioned only in John, and John says he used to "drive them all from the temple area: both sheep and cattle." So he caused a stampede. And I'd agree that it's okay for Christians to follow that example.
When he told the disciples the times was coming to trade their extra cloak for a sword, it's almost certain he was using a figure of speech, meaning that things were about to get rough. Three points show that he wasn't advising his disciples to arm themselves. First, they produce two swords, to which he responds, "That's enough." Well, two swords aren't enough for thirteen men to fight off an arrest squad, so what does he mean? What's more, the grammar is off. In Greek, he would have had to say, "Those are enough," or sound like a child with poor grammatical skills. It makes much more sense to understand him saying, "That's enough talk of swords," as he was frustrated with their refusal to understand. This reading is much more persuasive when you read its direct analog, where Jesus told them to "beware the yeast of the pharisees," and they responded, "Is he upset because we forgot the bread?" The third point that counts against reading this passage as advocating taking up arms is that a few verses later, Peter uses one of those two swords, and Jesus rebukes him, heals the man he attacks, and says, "Don't you know that all who draw the sword perish by the sword?"
Now, none of this argues against your main point, which is that the use of force isn't evil, but it also doesn't give us ground to hold that occupations involving force are commensurate with living out the gospel.
@snarkius@xanga - just because its not practical doesnt mean we are not supposed to do it. The relationship Christ set us up with is not practical. He who is first is supposed to be last. Washing those who are below us feet. we are saved by faith alone, we dont have to do anything. all of those things are paradoxically the opposit of what the world expects to do. its the same thing with militarry/police service. God says vengence is mine, i will repay. It is not our responsibility. God left us on this world to bring all people to repentance. It is the governments job to punish evil doers, but it is not a Christians responsibility. We are called to be strangers and sojourners. We dont have a country of origin, we are ambassadors from Heaven. How can an ambassador decide to join the military, while still being an ambasador, and kill people. How can the lost be reached if we are too busy killing them. God wants all people to come to repentance. That all people is literal. Just because our forefathers did something does not make it right. we were told to turn the other cheek, carry the baggage and extra mile. Do good to those who persecute us. love those who despitefully use us. that is what we are called to.
i'm not opposed to the police at all (except for the numerous times when they misuse their authority) but i'm extremely opposed to the military and would never consider joining any branch of it. once in a conversation about conscientious objectors, someone suggested i simply go help make weapons or armor or something instead of going to fight. hoooooooowever, that's not quite what i had in mind. i'm not interested in supporting the military in any way, either directly or indirectly.