I can’t imagine more than a (very) small number of people reading my blog with any regularity, especially considering it’s only been in existence for a short time. However, I’ve had a particular issue that’s been lingering with me for some time that I desire to be flushed out a bit. As the title of this post suggests, I want to talk about pacifism, or perhaps what I mean is nonviolent resistance. Actually, I think pacifism and nonviolent resistance are two different concepts. But I’m not afraid to admit that presently I speak with little clarity about these issues, so out of ignorance I sometimes use these two words as if they were synonyms. Nevertheless, my hope is that some of you that do actually read my blog will weigh in on the issues of pacifism and nonviolent resistance and hopefully I (we) can come to a better understanding of what these words mean, especially in the context of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. I suppose I could just read a book about these issues, but I have a feeling this approach might be more interesting, and hopefully, just as informative.
To provide some background, my curiosity surrounding pacifism/nonviolent resistance started after reading two books: Shane Claiborne’s Irresistible Revolution and Brian McClaren’s Everything Must Change. Both authors seem to insist the life and teachings of Jesus, as well as the witness of the NT, do not condone acts of violence. Undeniably, there are some pretty convincing statements made by Jesus and the writers of the NT that seem to be saying that violence of any kind is inconsistent with the gospel, but I’m wondering if there are legitimate exceptions that might allow a person to take very seriously the message of the gospel, and in good conscience, participate in certain acts of violence. Here are some related questions that I’ve had brewing in my mind for some time that will hopefully jump-start the conversation (but don't feel obligated to answer any of them): “Is there such a thing as Just War?” “Does our obligation to defend the weak ever lead us to violent acts against oppressors?” “What would our world look like today if Allied Forces had never put a stop to the aggression of Nazi Germany?”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
good thoughts ric. here is my take. violence has to be the answer at some point or we would probably be speaking german today. hitler wasn't going to stop if people were nice to him, he had to get hit in the mouth. at the same time though i think you see more people talking about nonviolent resistance because they feel like war should always be the last answer. in many opinions it wasn't this way in iraq. im not saying it was or wasn't but saying thats why i see this notion increasing in thought right now. pacifism does not work on a world government arena, but can work between person to person.
Ty, thanks for your response. About the whole speaking German thing, I think you're right, if Hitler hadn't got the shot to the mouth our world today would look drastically different. But here are my thoughts on nonviolent resistance and the "government arena": Jesus used nonviolent tactics to defeat the powers and principalities of his day, did he not? Christians believe that Jesus faced Rome and won. We believe Jesus proved to be king and not Caesar. Jesus seemed to be pretty active in the realm of governement and politics and he did it without the sword. Just some thoughts.... Also, in theory I really like the idea of noviolent resistance but find it hard to see how it fits 100% of the time in this broken world of ours.
Ric, I'm especially interested in your question of whether or not we can engage in violence at some point "in good conscience." I'm reading bonhoeffer now, so his story is on my mind, and I'm not sure that we could ever claim that our violence was Good. Ethics is often so messy that we are forced to choose between what is bad and what is worse, and if we are forced to use violence, then it becomes a scalding reminder of our brokeness and our need for the grace of God. The message: God's grace with us in the mess, as we mourn the impossibility of blamelessness.
very interesting idea Ric. took me a second to actually figure out what my stances on the issue is. it is especially important to me because i served a year in Afghanistan and as a Christian, struggled with this idea of non-violent tactics. my life depended on using my weapon as a defensive mechanism and the idea of having to shoot someone plagued me daily. i'm with tyler though. at some point, violence has to come out eventually. i came to believe that there is a true evil working in Afghanistan and anyone shooting at me was under that power. by shooting back, I was fighting the evil in this world and only making it a better place. i can only hope that i wasn't wrong in my thought process.
other than that, i tend to believe that violence is not the answer.
Evan, I appreciate your unique perspective, considering you were in a position of defending your very life. However, notions of "redemptive violence" still do not sit well with me. But as Joe rightly insists, there's nothing easy about making tough ethical decisions, infact its very messy.
Several of us from around the blogsphere are reading "Everything Must Change" together and discussing our thoughts. We've just begun, but we've set it up in a way where it's never to late to participate.
If you have any interest, you can visit us at:
http://readingforchange.wordpress.com
Post a Comment