A Different Perspective

Pacifism. The word inspires feelings of hostility among many Christians here in the United States. In fact, claim to be a hard core pacifist, and many question if you are a Christian at all. Where does this animosity come from? How is it that anti-pacifism is the favorable position for the majority of churchgoers here in the U.S.?
My own feelings on pacifism started in the early days of my pursuit of Christ. The sermon on the mount especially challenged my ideas about warfare. Could I be a soldier if I were drafted? Could I kill another human being, even if I believed the cause to be just? If someone were certainly going to kill me, does that give me the right to pull the trigger?

These are questions we all must face when looking at the teachings of the one we call Christ. The answers are not easy, and unfortunately, they are not black and white. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a pacifist who participated in a plot to kill Hitler. How many would fault him for his attempt?

Of course, at the time Bonhoeffer was conspiring to take Hitler’s life, it was already becoming evident to the German people what was happening to the Jews who had been their neighbors. Of the assassination plot, Bonhoeffer said it would be a sin to take Hitler’s life, but it would be a greater sin to let him live. This differentiates Bonhoeffer from many today who would call the current war in Iraq a righteous war.

Anti-Pacifism

What really strikes me about our current situation is the dominance of anti-pacifism. Even here on the "liberal" west coast, I talk to many Christians who think I am anti-American and possibly anti-Christian because I lean towards pacifism. I shudder to think what it is like in the land of my more conservative Hoosier roots.

Given the words of our Lord Jesus, anti-pacifist sentiment astounds me. Differing interpretations are understandable in this life which is full of complexities, but animosity towards a clearly legitimate position which at least seems to fall closer to Christ’s teaching baffles me. Read these words with an open heart, and ask yourself would this person easily, or at all, go to war:

"You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. "If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. "Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. "Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. "You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.’ "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. "For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? "If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." (Matthew 5:38-48 NAS95)

Because of this teaching and others, the Church has had to come to terms with war since Constantine converted and the Roman Empire became a Christian Empire. For a few hundred years prior to this, the church clearly maintained pacifist beliefs. The most glorious end to a Christian’s life in the days prior to Constantine was to peacefully surrender to martyrdom, if chosen to be martyred, and honor Christ by not denying Him. When the Empire now took on the label, "Christian," martyrdom became a non-issue and questions on war began to surface. Was it not just to defend yourself from invaders? Is it not good to go to war with those who pose a threat to the length and breadth of the Empire? Under Constantine, soldiers first brandished shields carrying the emblem of the cross.

Augustine first espoused the doctrine of "Just War," which was later expanded upon by Thomas Aquinas. Given the horrific things which leaders of nations are capable of, the church espoused a doctrine of war which would allow for it only under certain conditions. An article on suite101.com summarizes Auguistine’s Just War Doctrine well:

Most scholars point to St. Augustine of Hippo as the formulator of the Doctrine of the Just War. Extrapolated from The City of God, the principles have been formulated into these eight statements:

+ War must be the last resort after all other possible solutions have been tried and failed.
+ The reason for the war must be to redress rights actually violated or to defend against unjust demands backed by force.
+ The war must be openly and legally declared by a lawful government.
+ There must be a reasonable chance of winning.
+ Soldiers must try to distinguish between armies and civilians and never kill civilians on purpose.
+ The means used in fighting the war must be "proportionate" to the end sought.
+ The good to be done by the war must outweigh the evil which the war would do.
+ The winner must never require the utter humiliation of the loser.

(The full article can be read at : "What is a ‘Just War’")

Augustine developed this theology out of necessity. For years, there had been talk that pacifist Christians were not good citizens of the Empire. When the Roman Empire fell, Augustine felt the need to show that Christians can be good citizens. Augustine was a great philosopher, and he argues his points well in The City of God. However, did he arrive at this doctrine because he was following Christ, or because he was looking to avoid conflict between Christians and non in a fallen Empire? While his arguments are logical, do they truly represent Christ?

Some feel Augustine’s doctrine makes sense and rings true with the teachings of our Lord. The doctrine has dominated church theology and philosophy since his day. What have been the results of this doctrine?

The "Just Wars" of the Church

Historically, the most prominent of church-ordained "just wars" were the crusades of 1095-1291 C.E. As to date, the Holy Roman Catholic Church has not given any apology or expression of remorse for the crusades; they are still considered to be just wars. Using "crusade" terminology today shows an utter disregard for the atrocities committed during the crusades and a lack of understanding at the Muslim contempt for "Christian" nations.

The wars enumerated since the time of Augustine has rarely achieved one of the primary tenets of his doctrine: "The good to be done by the war must outweigh the evil which the war would do." More often than not, minor threats to sovereignty resulted in complete subjication of the offending nation. Or, wars resulted which caused the loss of life to be enormous on both sides without any charitable ending as hoped for by Augustine in his forumlation of the Just War Doctrine.

Heads of state with heavily Christian populations have used the rhetoric of just war since the term was first used in order to gain favor for military operations. Once a war is declared "just" all moral obligation seemingly disappears and Christians can support and even become combatants for the cause. Over time, "just wars" raged against more than just pagan nations.

Acceptance by the Church was frequently given when one "Christian" nation went to war against another who was in conflict with the Church or her leadership. This was seen on both Protestant and Catholic sides of the Reformation as Protestant countries and territories warred with Catholic and vice-versa. All believed they were fighting a just war because of the oppression of the other side. During the Reformation, the only thing that Reformers and Catholics could seemingly agree on was that they both hated the anabaptists; Reformers killed Catholics, Catholics killed Reformers, but everyone killed the Anabaptists. Who did the Anabaptists kill? No one – Anabaptists are pacifists.

Since the Reformation, both Christian and non-Christian theologians and philosophers have sought to define and update the Doctrine of Just War. Perhaps the most grievous adaptation of the doctrine was Sir Francis Bacon’s interpretation: A just war could be allowed if the aim was conversion to the faith; if they won’t accept Christ, force them to.

The results of nearly sixteen hundred years of the Doctrine of Just War compel Christians to rethink the compatibility of Christianity and war. The Middle East harbors grudges against Christians and Jews which date back even prior to the Crusades. Our wars have created a gap which only the grace of God can bridge. While we may be able to free some Muslims from tyrranical regimes, this good does not counteract the evils and hatred we spawn from our military activities there. Even among Christians wars have left damage which has left wounds festering even today. Only recently did the Pope formally apologize for the conquering of Constantinople (which was the center for the Eastern Orthodox Church since the schism in 1028 where the Roman See separated ties from the four other Sees of the Christian Church) allowing the healing process to begin.

In the midst of war, men do unthinkable things. These atrocities create a backlash which sometimes lasts for centuries or even millenia. At a minimum, the Church needs to be open to pacifism and not hostile towards it. Given the horrors of war, can Christians really hold pacifists in contempt for seeking other ways for resolving disputes?

Results of Pacifism

In sharp contrast to the consequences of "Just War" lie the historical results to Christian pacifism. Under the Roman Empire prior to Constantine, Christians were persecuted and during many seasons martyred for simply being Christian. The grace and love displayed by these early followers of Christ eventually won over their oppressors and conquered an Empire … without Christians shedding even one person’s blood for the cause of Christ.

Above, I mentioned the dual persecution of Anabaptists by both Protestant Reformers and Catholics. With rare exception, the Anabaptists submitted to martyrdom in the spirit of the early Christians. A popular method for killing anabaptists was to attach them to a heavy object and drown them. This was because the Anabaptists believed that a baptism which was not entered into by the will of the one being baptized was no baptism at all. The Protestants and Catholics chose to give them one last baptism, drowning.

Eventually, these peace- and grace-filled Christians won over their persecutors and the killing stopped. In many Protestant traditions today, especially in the Evangelical offshoots, the deed the Anabaptists were most known for (re-baptism or adult baptism) is practiced without question today.

Certainly, there is the danger that the persecution will not cease if we truly "turn the other cheek." A close friend of mine claimed that if my beliefs were followed we would inevitably be controlled by an evil dictator. While I cannot deny that as a possible result of my pacifism, I must say it is not the only conclusion possible. Is it too far of a stretch to imagine that displays of God’s grace even in the face of losing rights or even death just may cause a turn of events in and of itself? Do we have such little trust in God’s sovereignty that we cannot trust what He says is the right way to live?

Differing Opinions

Backtracking to my brief mention of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, I feel that neither side will find absolute justification in the Scriptures. I cannot imagine that it would not have been sin to allow Hitler to live knowing what he was doing if one had the opportunity to take his life. Remember, however, Bonhoeffer considered both actions sinful – the terrible result of being caught in a sin-stained world which sometimes left one with no truly righteous options. That being said, I leave myself open to accusations of hypocrisy and incoherency. All I can say to that charge is that I believe any incoherency my beliefs contain still lie closer to the way of Christ than the coherency of the Docrine of Just War.

While I oppose my brothers and sisters who hold to the Doctrine of Just War in this matter, I especially respect those who disdain war as the option and only exercise it when the criteria for Just War has truly been met. In my heart, I know that a grace-filled Christian can believe in Just War and should be respected as part of my Christian family. I will not return the animosity poured out on pacifists. These Christians have a position which, while I strongly disagree, is legitimate and can be followed without guilt of deliberate sin.

My lament finds root in the hostility I incur for believing the way of Christ to be one of pacifism. My heart breaks when Christians give the greatest applause and support for war to the point where they are clearly and decidedly happy about going to war. So happy that there is no room for those who are not excited about the prospect or who even oppose the war.

My prayers and hopes lie in a turning of hearts and a compassion for one another which allows for pacifists and non to exist in the Church without the word "anti" being rightfully used as a label for either position.

---

Alan Hartung is the General Editor of THEOOZE.
Note: This article was first published on THEOOZE