The Non-resistant Christian

[ReformationNow]

I've been studying pacifism/non-resistance for quite some time now, and have decided to join rank with pacifistic Christians.

The message of the Gospels is overwhelmingly filled with peace. Jesus' teachings in the Sermon on the Mount dealt with the response a Christian should have towards those who committ wrongs against us. He taught that we should have love for our enemy instead of hatred. We ought to be peacemakers. Instead of being angry at those who wrong us, we should pray for them. We are told to return good for evil. To pray for those who persecute us. We are told in the epistles that we do not fight against flesh and blood, but rather against spiritual beings. Our weapons of warfare are not carnal. Over and over in the New Testament, we are taught love for our enemies instead of anger and hatred. The Gospel of Christ is a Gospel of Peace.

The early Church evidently agreed. During the initial 150-200 years after Christ's ministry, pacifism and non-resistance were taught in the Church. I will supply quotes as evidence of this fact.

Justin Martyr(Justin of Caesarea wrote: "And we who formerly used to murder one another do not only now refrain from making war upon our enemies, but also, that we may not lie nor deceive our examiners, willingly die confessing Christ." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, page 176)

"And we who formerly used to murder one another do not only now refrain from making war upon our enemies, but also, that we may not lie nor deceive our examiners, willingly die confessing Christ." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, page 176)

Irenaeus wrote in his Treaties Against Heresies: "But preached by the apostles – who went forth from Jerusalem – throughout all the earth, caused such a change in the state of things, that these [nations] did form the swords and war-lances into plows, and changed them into pruning hooks for reaping the corn, that is, into instruments used for peaceful purposes, and that they are now unaccustomed to fighting, but when smitten, offer the other cheek." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, page 512)

Origen mentions Pacifism as a trait of those who follow Christ saying: "And to those who inquire of us whence we come, or who is our founder, we reply that we are come, agreeably to the counsels of Jesus, to cut down our hostile and insolent wordy swords into plows, and to convert into pruning-hooks the spears formerly employed in war. For we no longer take up sword against nation, nor do we learn war any more, having become children of peace, for the sake of Jesus, who is our leader, instead of those who our fathers followed, among whom we were strangers to the covenant." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4, pg. 558)

"You can not demand military service of Christians any more than you can of priests. We do not go forth as soldiers." (Against Celsus VIII.7.3 about 240 AD)

Tertullian, the first of the great Latin Apologists writes: "There is no agreement between the divine and the human sacrament (Roman military oath), the standard of Christ and the standard (flag) of the devil, the camp of light and the camp of darkness. One soul cannot be due to two masters – God and Caesar." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, pg. 73)

"Shall it be held lawful to made an occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword shall perish by the sword? And shall the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not become him even to sue at law? And shall he apply the chain, and prison, and the torture, and the punishment, who is not the avenger even of his own wrongs? … Touching this primary aspect of the question, as to the unlawfulness even of a military life itself, I shall not add more,… "(Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, pg. 99-100)

Lacantius was the last of the prominent apologists before the era of Constantine. He wrote: "For when God forbids us to kill, He not only prohibits us from open violence, which is not even allowed by the public laws, but He warns us against the commission of those things which are esteemed lawful among men. Thus it will be neither lawful for a just man to engage in warfare, since his warfare is justice itself, not to accuse any one of a capital charge, because it makes no difference whether you put a man to death by word, or rather by the sword, since it is the act of putting to death itself which is prohibited." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7. Pg. 187)

"Or why should he carry on war, and mix himself with the passions of others, when his mind is engaged in perpetual peace with men? [The Christian] considers it unlawful not only himself to commit slaughter, but to be present with those who do it, and to behold it." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7. Pg. 153)

Athenagoras wrote (about 180 AD), 'How can we possibly kill anyone, we who call those women murderers who take drugs to induce an abortion, we who say they will have to give an account before God one day! We are convinced that with God nothing goes unexamined, and that the body, after serving the irrational urges and lusts of the soul, will have its share in punishment. We have, therefore, every reason to detest even the slightest sin.' (A Plea Regarding Christians 32-35).

Hippolytus (218 A.D) states that soldiers who become Christians are not allowed to kill and must refuse to obey orders to kill. He also says that judges who want to become followers of the Christ must resign or be rejected by the church. (‘The Apostolic Tradition’ 16).

Yale church historian Roland Bainton writes; "From the end of the New Testament period to the decade 170-180 there is no evidence whatever of Christians in the army. All of the East and West repudiated participation in warfare for Christians."

Non-resistance was a way of life for the early Church. Should it not still be so for God's people today?

[Dave]

Well, the Catholic Church teaches that there's such a thing as a just war. Note that I said "just," as there's also such a thing as an unjust war.

Yes, Jesus told us to love our enemies and to pray for them, but it's comparing apples and oranges when there's a clear and present danger to our country. It's not a question of vengeance; it's a question of safety.

CATECHISM:

2309: The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time: the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain; all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective; there must be serious prospects of success; the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition. These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine. The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

Edited September 2, 2003 by Dave

[dUSt]

There's nothing wrong with being a pacifist Catholic.

[geetarplayer]

Some kids were ridiculing me and joking about my faith today. I played along, didn't get too angry. I just laughed and answered their questions (which were pretty lame, by the way: "Is this your bling-bling?" referring to my plain rope-and-cross of a necklace). Later I was wondering wether or not I should have shot some witty insults their way, but this makes me feel a lot better.

-Mark

[ReformationNow]

Some kids were ridiculing me and joking about my faith today. I played along, didn't get too angry. I just laughed and answered their questions (which were pretty lame, by the way: "Is this your bling-bling?" referring to my plain rope-and-cross of a necklace). Later I was wondering wether or not I should have shot some witty insults their way, but this makes me feel a lot better.

-Mark

People ridicule what they do not understand. Scripture tells us to rejoice when we are persecuted, and to pray for those who do so. We are to bless them and not to curse. Do not overcome evil with evil, but rather overcome evil with good.

It's hard in this society not to fight back, but we must remember that many Christians endure much worse in other countries. Vengeance belongs to God, and He will repay.

[dUSt]

ReformationNow,

You say vengeance belongs to God. Is this what you meant? For if we are to be imitators of Christ, and Christ is God, then being a pacifist wouldn't be imitating Him.

I am somewhat of a pacifist myself, although not totally--as I do believe there are times to defend oneself against attack--physically, mentally and most importantly, spiritually.

God bless.

[geetarplayer]

That's what confuses me. I've been told that the only way to get them to stop is to earn their respect, which is near impossible for me because I'm what some would consider a "dork" at a school where labels are all-too-important and practically permanent. My friend told me that there are some times when I need to be assertive, stand up for myself, tell them, "Stop doing that." I rarely do, but when I actually stand up for myself, they shoot me down. When I stand up for others, they shoot me down. Where do you draw the line between being Christ-like and being assertive? How can I let them know I'm serious without blowing up?

-Mark

[ReformationNow]

ReformationNow,

You say vengeance belongs to God. Is this what you meant? For if we are to be imitators of Christ, and Christ is God, then being a pacifist wouldn't be imitating Him.

I am somewhat of a pacifist myself, although not totally--as I do believe there are times to defend oneself against attack--physically, mentally and most importantly, spiritually.

God bless.

Romans 12:19-20 "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written VENGEANCE IS MINE; I WILL REPAY, saith the Lord. Therefore, IF THINE ENEMY HUNGER, FEED HIM; IF HE THIRST, GIVE HIM DRINK: FOR IN SO DOING THOU SHALT HEAP COALS OF FIRE ON HIS HEAD.

[ReformationNow]

That's what confuses me. I've been told that the only way to get them to stop is to earn their respect, which is near impossible for me because I'm what some would consider a "dork" at a school where labels are all-too-important and practically permanent. My friend told me that there are some times when I need to be assertive, stand up for myself, tell them, "Stop doing that." I rarely do, but when I actually stand up for myself, they shoot me down. When I stand up for others, they shoot me down. Where do you draw the line between being Christ-like and being assertive? How can I let them know I'm serious without blowing up?

-Mark

I used to get picked on by bullies too. I've found that there's one tactic that will stop all but the most hardened bullies. Tell them you'll pray for them. And then do pray for them. Many bullies are otherwise good people who just go with the flow. And when they realize what they are doing, they tend to stop. Take it with a grain of salt. God will repay them. Ask God to work in their hearts.

[kdewolf2]

Non-resistance was a way of life for the early Church. Should it not still be so for God's people today?

We should not initiate violence, but if someone attacks us we have a right to defend ourselves.

Here's a link to a really, really, really, really, really good article you should definitely read. It's kind of longish, but it's worth it.

War and the Eclipse of Moral Reasoning

[dUSt]

The Cardinal Ratzinger fan club. lol

Ooooohhh... EXCITING!!! hahaha

Ratzinger rocks--but I can't help imagining a bunch of members gathering for pizza, wearing Ratzinger t-shirts at a Moose Lodge.

[Guest pedro]

Reformation Now,

I think I'm becoming more of a "pacifist" myself, yet I think that war/violence can be a LAST resort. I think we (Faithful Christians) should be like the early Christians who were ready to go to their deaths' as martyrs. But when you are the President/leader of a country who is responsible for the lives of your citizens (or the lives of defenseless people within the global community) who may not be "ready" to die a martyr's death, then I think that force is a necessary defense. I just don't think a president can say "Citizens, your on your own...but don't worry you're going to heaven." I dunno.

Notice, I did say that war should be a last resort. War shouldn't be an alternative after a couple tries at negotiating, but truly only once a peaceful resolution is impossible. It is sad though, that as a nation the United States spends billions of dollars and much of its human resources in the "war business." If our nation truly was serious about finding peaceful resolutions, shouldn't there be schools that parallel our military schools in excellence that teach every strategy of conflict resolution, negotiation, international relations, etc.

I just think that if we as a nation spent a fraction of what we put into our military into the development of diplomats, arbitrators, and other kinds of international representatives, who have NO political agendas to meet, our country and truly our world would be a more peaceful place. Afterall, the U.S. IS a leader...why not be a leader in peace???

Any thoughts are appreciated.

-Pete

[Guest blostopher]

. . . I just think that if we as a nation spent a fraction of what we put into our military into the development of diplomats, arbitrators, and other kinds of international representatives, who have NO political agendas to meet, our country and truly our world would be a more peaceful place.  Afterall, the U.S. IS a leader...why not be a leader in peace???

First, for anybody considering this issue I'd like to recommend the following article, which basically covers the vast range of Christian thought on war & peace -- I think it's a very informative essay and one worth studying.

'War and the Eclipse of Moral Reasoning'

http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/Blosser_ar...le_eclipse.html

Secondly, I just wanted to express my thoughts to Pete after reading his post -- while I do think that diplomacy and arbitration is important, when it comes to cultivating peace in this world first and foremost I think the biggest problem we face today is the moral degeneration of our nation.

Shortly after 9/11, Cardinal Ratzinger caused somewhat of a stir by saying that 'The West' isn't necessarily the greatest nation, and in some ways Islam was morally superior to Christianity.

His exact words were:

"It is true that the Muslim world is not totally mistaken when it reproaches the West of Christian tradition of moral decadence and the manipulation of human life," he said. "This imposes on us a serious examination of conscience."

"The truth of the Christian faith appears to us in all its depth, but we mustn´t forget that, sadly, it has been darkened many times by the concrete behaviour of those who called themselves Christians," he said. "Islam has also had moments of great splendor and decadence in the course of its history. "

Source: http://www.cathnews.com/news/203/19.php

This shouldn't be construed as an endorsement of the Taliban. What I think what he was getting at is that as long as Islamic nations look at the United States -- which, unfortunately, is by and large through the medium of American television -- and witness the moral decadence of a nation that still calls itself 'Christian', a nation that trivializes sex and slaughters babies without thought,

they can only conclude that their holy war or jihad is justified. Consequently, the greatest contribution we can make towards peace is do our part in bringing about a grassroots revolution toward right living, and re-discovering the kind of nation America's founding fathers had in mind.

So, that's my thoughts.

Christopher (who just surfed in)

[ReformationNow]

Reformation Now,

  I think I'm becoming more of a "pacifist" myself, yet I think that war/violence can be a LAST resort. I think we (Faithful Christians) should be like the early Christians who were ready to go to their deaths' as martyrs. But when you are the President/leader of a country who is responsible for the lives of your citizens (or the lives of defenseless people within the global community) who may not be "ready" to die a martyr's death, then I think that force is a necessary defense. I just don't think a president can say "Citizens, your on your own...but don't worry you're going to heaven." I dunno.

  Notice, I did say that war should be a last resort. War shouldn't be an alternative after a couple tries at negotiating, but truly only once a peaceful resolution is impossible.  It is sad though, that as a nation the United States spends billions of dollars and much of its human resources in the "war business."  If our nation truly was serious about finding peaceful resolutions, shouldn't there be schools that parallel our military schools in excellence that teach every strategy of conflict resolution, negotiation, international relations, etc. 

  I just think that if we as a nation spent a fraction of what we put into our military into the development of diplomats, arbitrators, and other kinds of international representatives, who have NO political agendas to meet, our country and truly our world would be a more peaceful place.  Afterall, the U.S. IS a leader...why not be a leader in peace??? 

Any thoughts are appreciated.

-Pete

Pacifism/nonresistance is for the Christian. The government is ordained of God to bear the sword and punish evil(Rom 13). I do agree that war should always be a last resort. I just don't think it's something that a Christian should be involved in.

[cmotherofpirl]

So we are not to fight for what is right?

If more people thouhgt that way we would all be speaking german.