I've developed a reputation as being a pacifist. I suppose this is my own fault. I do throw the term around in casual conversation, and I did participate in the
XCCP project. And there are probably a dozen posts I've authored on Revelife with the term 'pacifist' in the title somewhere.
So it doesn't matter how much I resist the term - I'm probably stuck with it.
But I do resist the term. It seems to imply that there is some ideology - pacifism - that I believe in and adhere to. Or some program - pacifism - that I want to see instituted. And it seems to imply that I believe that the world would be a less violent place if only a few people would put down their guns. And it seems to imply that I view police officers and soldiers and gun owners and professional wrestlers as bad people, engaging in daily sin.
But none of that is true. In fact, the whole matter of pacifism is largely irrelevant to what I believe.
What I believe is that the New Testament models, especially in the life of Christ, what the church and its members are to look like. In fact, in the language of the New Testament, the members of the church
take on the life of Christ, become the body of Christ. This means two things. Unity and love.
In terms of unity, there is only one church, though it exists in multiple institutional agencies. There is one church, present throughout the whole world and across time. When Christians take up arms against other Christians, it is not that they are committing some sin called 'violence.' But they are committing violence against their own body.
So Christians should remain in unity with other Christians. It is madness that a French Catholic and a German Catholic could both receive communion from a military chaplain, and then rush off to shoot one another. But Christians should also love, not only Christians, but everyone. "Enemies" are explicitly mentioned.
The New Testament tells us explicitly the sorts of things it means by love. It means: do good to them, bless them, pray for them, refuse to hit back, refuse to withhold goods from them, lend without expectation of repayment, do not condemn, offer food and drink.
Whatever your views on violence in the abstract, these are the actions Christians are called upon to engage in. This is the church's mission to the world. That is why pacifism is fun to argue about, but completely irrelevant to the life of the church.
What are your thoughts on pacifism? Do you think that it's relevant to the church and your beliefs? If pacifism is something really important to you, what makes it so important?
True
Comments (6)
You’re a frequent commentator. I’m an infrequent answerer. But I shall bestow an answer.
Many things fly through my head. C.S. Lewis’ passage from Mere Christianity.
It is no good quoting "Thou shalt not kill." There are two Greek words: the ordinary word to kill and
the word to murder. And when Christ quotes that commandment He uses the murder one in all three
accounts, Matthew, Mark, and Luke. And I am told there is the same distinction in Hebrew. All killing
is not murder any more than all sexual intercourse is adultery. When soldiers came to St. John the
Baptist asking what to do, he never remotely suggested that they ought to leave the army: nor did
Christ when He met a Roman sergeant-major—what they called a centurion. The idea of the
knight—the Christian in arms for the defence of a good cause—is one of the great Christian ideas.
War is a dreadful thing, and I can respect an honest pacifist, though I think he is entirely mistaken.
What I cannot understand is this sort of semipacifism you get nowadays which gives people the idea
that though you have to fight, you ought to do it with a long face and as if you were ashamed of it. It
is that feeling that robs lots of magnificent young Christians in the Services of something they have a
right to, something which is the natural accompaniment of courage— a kind of gaity and
wholeheartedness.
I have often thought to myself how it would have been if, when I served in the first world war, I and
some young German had killed each other simultaneously and found ourselves together a moment
after death. I cannot imagine that either of us would have felt any resentment or even any
embarrassment. I think we might have laughed over it.
There’s a scene from the movie Gandhi. A devout Christian who shares the pacifistic views has joined his ashram, and he (Gandhi) wryly observes that the Christian’s fellow communicants have anathematized him, because he was too sanctified for them. You’ve got to see the scene to appreciate all the subtlety and somewhat snarky humor of the comment.
There’s the uncanny but true story of the Christmas Truce of 1914, a series of unofficial ceasefires along the Western Front that caused the high commands of all the combatant nations to fly into a blind rage.
There’s the story Lewis included in the Chronicles of Narnia, of the Calormene who believed on Aslan.
…a young Calormene sitting under a chestnut tree beside a
clear stream of water. It was Emeth. He rose at once and
bowed gravely.
“Sir,” he said to Peter, “I know not whether you are my
friend or my foe, but I should count it my honour to have
you for either. Has not one of the poets said that a noble
friend is the best gift and a noble enemy the next best?”
What am I saying? I’m conflicted. I accept what you’re saying on a theoretical basis…but I would have to see the other guy lay down his gun first. I’m aware, of course, of those both Christian and non- who’ve been committed enough to nonviolence to allow their own martyrdom. The Amish were as sheep to the slaughter.
Perfect.
@wrybreadspread@xanga - I can appreciate your conflicted state. C.S, Lewis readily admits to having not studied the realm of pacifism in his essay entitled Why I Am Not A Pacifist. It shows in his reasoning too. The essay was surprisingly unimpressive to me. I wonder, what is our motivation and hope if we need the opponent to act in love first? It seems to me that Jesus points us to living in a way that does not seek the mere continuance of physical life or to embrace strategies that are viewed as "effective" by the worlds standards but rather to be faithful in our unrelenting love and forgiveness. I've come to believe that we, as Christians, not only ought to lay down our weapons as an example to our enemies but to also commit ourselves to never putting those weapons in our hands (or the hands of those we raise/lead) at all.
Gandhi is a great film. I'm actually watching it with someone this week. I'll keep my eyes open for that scene.
Wow, excellent word of Truth spoken here!
Thank you for sharing this word.
i'm having trouble understanding how your views don't jive with pacifism. maybe pacifism is a lot more concrete as an ideology than i'm aware of.
I am against warfare especially those involving weapons of mass destruction, but not against competitive sports and mastering the art of self-defence such as marksmanship and martial arts. I am not against small-scale fighting, arguments AND debates because that's part of who we are. We are creatures of strength. If we do not strengthen our body, mind and spirit, one day, the other species will catch up with us and force us to extinction.
I believe that pacifism has historically been no part of the Church...... I think it is irrelevant to individuals but even if the Church is not pacifist, it should not promote war and hatred.