non-violence Archives - Redeeming God

It was Friday afternoon, around 12:30. The Muslim Friday Jumah prayer was supposed to begin, and 107 Muslims had gathered. But as they were washing their feet and faces, and laying out their prayer rugs, the authorities called me on the phone and told me to cancel the Jumah prayer.

I am a white Christian pastor. I work in a prison as a chaplain.

But due to a looming security concern, I had no other choice, and went and informed the gathering Muslims that Jumah had been canceled for that day.

The seething anger directed my way was palpable. All 107 Muslims stood up, glared at me, and started to gather around. I sensed that how I responded in the next few seconds would determine whether I lived or died that day.

“You can’t cancel the Jumah prayer,” said the Imam of the group. “It’s mandatory. It’s required.”

“Yes, I know,” I calmly responded. “But there is a security concern, and until it’s resolved, everybody is required to return to their housing units.” In a prison, security takes precedence even over religion, but even still, nobody likes to have their religious service cancelled.

“So what are we supposed to do, Chaplain?” asked the Imam. “Allah demands that we pray, but you are demanding we not pray. Who do you think we should obey?”

The crowd of Muslims pressed in closer to hear how I would respond. My mind raced, and I knew that the security concern could quickly escalate into a security crisis (and possibly a riot) depending on the next words out of my mouth.

It is very difficult to practice nonviolence in a system that is inherently and purposefully built upon the principles of violence. The central principal of violence is that you get what you want by having a bigger stick. You may not always use the stick; sometimes having it is enough. This idea was immortalized in Teddy Roosevelt’s famous explanation of his foreign policy: “Speak softly, and carry a big stick.” As long as your stick is bigger than your enemy’s, this should be enough to deter him from war.

The prison system, in which I work, is founded on this principal. By their very nature, prisons take people who have engaged in various forms of violence and put them in a situation where they have very few sticks at their disposal, while all the guards and prison staff have much larger sticks. The big stick principal is what keeps the prison relatively safe and secure.

But the big sticks are not what you think. Despite the common perception, most prison staff in the west no longer carry weapons of any kind. Guards do not have guns or even billy clubs. They typically are “armed” only with a radio. Outmanned and overpowered, the modern prison guard is trained to use their minds and their mouths to maintain peace inside a prison.

But it doesn’t always work. And when it doesn’t, riots break out, people are killed, and yes, this is when the guns are brought in. Though even then, only non-lethal munitions are used.

Working in the prison system as I do, I have found a “weapon” that is even more powerful than the radio. And it is the constant “radio connection” I have with God.

So in that moment, as the Muslims angrily waited for my answer, I quickly asked God for wisdom on what to say. And He showed me.

“You should pray,” I said.

There was a collective gasp by the Muslims.

I could sense their thoughts. Was the chaplain mocking them? Or was he actually telling prison inmates to disobey an order?

But I continued. “Nobody is demanding that you not pray. I invite you to pray. I want you to pray. I ask you to pray. I hope that you will pray. But today, because of the security concern, you are going to have to pray down in your housing units. Allah is powerful, is he not? He will hear your prayers there just as well as he will hear them in this place. So pray to Allah that this situation would be resolved quickly and peacefully. Then maybe we can get you back up here to the chapel a little later this afternoon for your communal Jumah prayer.”

They started at me, still trying to decide how to respond.

I waited.

Finally, the Imam turned to the gathered Muslims and said, “The Chaplain is right. Allah can hear our prayers and work to resolve this situation quickly. We will return to our housing units.”

Later that afternoon, I was indeed able to make arrangements for the Muslims to return to the Chapel for their afternoon Jumah prayer. It was late, but at least it was done. The Muslims praised Allah for hearing and answering their prayers, and I praised Jesus for answering mine.

During my years of working as a prison chaplain, I have found six principles that help me navigate the tricky and treacherous waters of practicing nonviolence in a system built on violence. The six principles form an acrostic for “CHRIST” because they are founded upon the teachings and example of Jesus Christ.

Here are the six principles, with a brief explanation of each.

Creativity.

Our world trains us that when we are faced with violence, the best response is greater violence. We use violence to fight violence. But violence always and only leads to more violence, so those who would practice non-violence must start to find alternative, creative solutions out of violent situations.

This is easier said than done, however, and so our attempts at creative responses must be bathed in prayer for God, the Creator, to guide us into creative non-violent responses as well. There is no “one size fits all” response to violence, for each situation is different and requires a different response. So creativity is required.

Honesty.

It takes two to tango. It also takes two to fight. And have you ever noticed that in nearly every violent engagement, both sides think the other one “started it”? Even in the case of terrorists flying planes into skyscrapers, they thought that they were righteously responding to the unjust treatment of their people by the United States. Even Hitler believed he was responding to the unjust treatment of Germany after their losses in World War I.

So in any sort of violent engagement, we must be brutally honest with how we ourselves contributed to the problem. We must not and cannot place all the blame on the other person, for this will only cause greater problems.

Realism.

Let’s be realistic: non-violence doesn’t always end violence. We live in an evil world, and sometimes, evil wins. So we must not think that non-violence always “works” and is the magic cure-all for everything that ails the world. It isn’t. It doesn’t always work. In fact, maybe we could say that it rarely works.

So why practice non-violence? Because even if non-violence rarely works, this is still better than violence, which never works. Violence always and only creates more violence. But sometimes, non-violence creates peace, and therefore, it has a better success rate. But we must be realistic and recognize that a non-violent response will not always bring an end to violence. It often won’t.

Incarnation.

If we want to practice non-violence, we must understand that we are incarnating Jesus to the world, just as He incarnated God to us. It is not we who are out there all on our own standing up for love, patience, forgiveness, and peace, but it is Jesus in us who is standing up for these things. Furthermore, a recognition that we are the incarnation of Jesus on earth encourages us to live as He lived and love as He loved.

Strength.

It is very easy to respond to violence with violence. People often talk about the courage and bravery of war, and indeed, it does take courage to charge onto the field of battle, not knowing if you will make it back off.

Similarly, it does indeed take courage and bravery to pull a knife or a gun on an assailant. However, it takes greater strength and courage to stand up against violence without violence. We must not think that non-violence is the weak way out. It is the bravest and strongest way out.

It is much harder to take the blows that fall on your back without retaliating than to lash out and trade blow for blow. Non-violence is not weakness or cowardice, but takes the greatest strength and courage.

Trust.

If God is non-violent, and calls us to practice non-violence as well, then we must trust God to work in us and through us, even though our minds, wills, and bodies scream out in protest at the ways of non-violence.

It is only when we trust in God to bring a solution to a bad situation that God will step in to do exactly that. And related to this, in light of the previous five principles, it important to know that even if we die while practicing non-violence, we can still trust God to use our death to create peace, just as He did in Jesus. A resolute trust in God reminds us that sometimes it is better to die than to kill.

Conclusion

Jesus modeled the way for us to live with non-violence toward others. Yes, we must resist evil wherever it is found, and we must stand up for righteousness and justice, but we must do so in the ways of Jesus, through non-violent resistance.

What methods and practices have you found which help you resist non-violently? Do you think that such forms of resistance can help solve the problems of violence that the world faces today? Why or why not? Which of the six CHRIST principles outlined above will be most challenging for you to practice? Let us know in the comment section below!

[Note: This blog post is part of the 2018 Blogging Carnival for Nonviolence. Go here to see the other posts.]

It’s not Personal; it’s Just War

By Jeremy Myers

11 Comments

Have you ever heard someone say, “It’s not personal; it’s just business”? This statement is usually said in the context of one person destroying the livelihood of another person through a hostile corporate takeover, or pushing a company out of business, or some sort of other action which ruins that other person’s company or income stream.

Of course, the person who is losing their livelihood, income, or business nearly always takes this attack personally. It is impossible not to. Each person is intimately connected with what they do and how they earn their income and provide for themselves and their family. It is deeply “personal” when someone else tries to take that away.

Which brings me to the concept of “Just War.” Just War theory is the idea that some wars are good, right, holy, and just. When such wars are waged, the attacking army often views their actions as good and godly, so that many of those on the receiving end of these attacks should be pleased and happy about the bombs falling out of the sky and the bullets whizzing by their heads because they are being set free and liberated from some form of evil that had enslaved them.

In other words, some proponents of “Just War theory” give the impression that as our armies march off to kill others in God’s name, we can be saying, “It’s not personal; it’s Just War,” and they expect people to say “Thank you!” as bombs fall on their heads.

Yes, this is a caricature of the Just War position, but when you listen to advocates of Just War theory, this caricature is not too far off the mark. They see themselves as liberators and freedom fighters who use war to set others free.

Let us look briefly at Just War theory, and how it is defined. Following this, I will suggest an alternative method to accomplishing God’s will in this world.

Rules of Just War

The rules for Just War were first developed by Thomas Aquinas (c1225-74) and Francisco de Vitoria (c1483-1546) and are still referred to by Christians today. They are as follows:

-it must be fought by a legal recognized authority, eg, a government
-the cause of the war must be just
-the war must be fought with the intention to establish good or correct evil
-there must be a reasonable chance of success
-the war must be the last resort (after all diplomatic negotiations have been tried and failed)
-only sufficient force must be used and civilians must not be involved

Stated differently:

A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.
A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.
A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient–see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with “right” intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.
A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.
The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.
The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.
The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.

The Primary Problem with Just War Theory

Just War theory initially seems like a good approach. After all, how else are we to stop evil and violence in this world?

But the truth is that when you talk to any group or government that is engaging in war, they ALL think that their cause is just and that their actions will right a wrong. I challenge you to find a war in human history where one of the sides in the war thought that their involvement in that war was evil and wrong, or that their cause was unjust.

When people and nations march off to war, everybody thinks their cause is righteous, that they are defending themselves against evil and tyranny, and that God is on their side. Go ask Muslim Jihadist, and he will tell you that the violence they engage in against others is holy, right, and just. Jihad, after all, is “Holy War.” Just War, Holy War, Jihad, they’re all the same thing. I wrote about this here: All War is Holy War.

The truth is that all wars are “Just Wars” … or none of them are.

And since we know that most wars are not “Just Wars,” this means that no war is a Just War. We just deceive ourselves into thinking that our war is just while “their” war is evil.

The only real difference between a “Just War” and an evil war is that the people who engage in “Just War” have come up with some excuses to justify their actions in the war. And since every group and government justifies their own, this means that every war is a “Just War” from that group’s perspective.

To put it another way, we could say that “A Just War is a war I engage in, while an evil war is one you engage in. All my wars are just, while all your wars are evil.” But of course, our opponents in war think the same thing. They think their actions are just while ours are evil.

So you see? There is no such thing as a Just War; there are just wars that we justify in our own minds.

So …. Pacifism is the Answer?

No. Pacifism is not the answer either.

Both Pacifism and Just War are inherently self-defeating and impossible to practice.

There is no such thing as a true pacifist. Pacifists want to do no harm, to engage in no violence, to kill nothing and hurt nothing. Many pacifists are vegetarians, or even vegans, because they do not want to participate in the killing of animals. And yet few pacifists have difficulty with taking antibiotic medicine or spraying their counter with Lysol to ward off germs and bacteria. But germs and bacteria are living microorganisms. So it is okay to kill them, but not larger organisms? At what point does killing become wrong?

How about bugs and insects? Almost all pacifists drive cars. When you drive a car, you will kill insects every single time. Your tires will run over ants and beetles, bees and butterflies will be crushed against your windshield. I once spent a few hours in the woods with a pacifist, and he was swatting mosquitos right along with the rest of us.

People say that Jesus was a pacifist, but it appears to me from Scripture that He ate lamb at the Passover, and fish on the shore of Galilee. People point out that the text doesn’t actually say he ate meat. Fine. But He certainly caught it, killed it, cooked it, and served it. Several times in the Gospels, for example, He gives His disciples a miraculous catch of fish. So many, the boat threatened to sink. And He knew that these fish would be killed and eaten. And in John 21:9, after one of these miraculous catches, when the disciples reach shore, Jesus already has a fire going with fish cooking on the fire.

The point is that true and complete pacifism is inherently impossible to perfectly practice in this world.

So how do we stop evil?

In order to discover how best to respond to evil, let us look at the foundational motivation of both Just War Theory and Pacifism.

Proponents of Just War theory believe that we must stand up for what is right. We must stand up against evil. They are absolutely correct in this belief.

Proponents of Pacifism believe that violence is wrong; especially the violence that takes human life. They are absolutely correct in this belief.

But if we hold to Just War, then (as we have seen), there is no end to violence. Violence always and only begets more violence. Everybody thinks their war is just, and so a “Just War” only leads to a retaliatory “Just War.” There is no end to this cycle.

Similarly, if we hold to Pacifism, then we will often let evil win because we fail to properly stand up to violence and evil, thereby allowing ourselves or others to get steamrolled by violence. People who are pacifists sometimes no nothing but sit there (or shout at) evil while it is occurring, when they should be taking an active stand against it.

The Third Way

Thankfully, Just War and Pacifism are not the only two options. There is a third way, which is the way of Jesus, Martin Luther King Jr., Ghandi, and numerous others.

This third way approach to evil and violence takes the strengths of both Just War and Pacifism while avoiding the weaknesses and drawbacks. This “Third Way” is called Non-Violent Resistance.

It stands up to evil wherever it is found, but with a commitment to doing so non-violently.

The difficulty with this approach is that since we live in a world that is bathed in violence, we have trouble seeing how a non-violent approach can stop the flood of violence. It is difficult to imagine how non-violent resistance can be effective in stopping the spread of evil and violence.

How, for example, would non-violent resistance have stopped Hitler? The truth is that I do not know. (Although part of the answer involves never waging World War I. Hitler was a product of Germany’s loss in World War I. So if World War I had never happened, then World War II would not have happened either. And when you look at the events which started World War I, it was a war that never should have been waged.)

The greatest difficulty with non-violent resistance, however, is that there are no formulas to follow or steps to carry out. The rules to violence are easy: If you are going to engage in violence, make sure your weapons and army are bigger than those of your enemy. There are no such rules with non-violent resistance. Each situation is unique, and requires a unique response.

Responding to Hitler non-violently requires a whole different set of actions than responding to a man on the street who wants to rob you and gunpoint.

Nevertheless, there are six principles I would like to suggest for all non-violent resistance.

The Six Principles of Non-Violent Resistance

The six principles of non-violent resistance form an acrostic which spells CHRIST. Jesus Christ was the perfect example of how to respond non-violently to evil, and so it is appropriate that His title, Christ, helps guide us into our own way of non-violence.

Here are the six principles. Non-Violent resistance requires:

Creativity (bathed in prayer) in the face of evil.
Honesty about yourself, and how you contributed to the problem.
Realism about the world situation and the reality of evil. Violence will often “win.”
Incarnation of the love, patience, and forgiveness of God as seen in Jesus.
Strength and courage to stand while not retaliating.
Trust in God to work, and to recognize that sometimes it is better to die than kill.

Note that as we carry out these principles in our live, we are not seeking revolution, but revelation. The key to non-violent resistance is to reveal the character and nature of God as revealed in Jesus Christ.

We change the world by showing it a different and better way to peace than the way it knows, which is the way of war and bloodshed.

The world has never imagined that there can be another way, but Jesus has revealed it, and now our task is to reveal it as well. We cannot force change upon the world, but we can change how we ourselves live in response to others, and when they see this, they might be inspired to live differently as well. As such, our lives are prophetic. Through our words and actions, we reveal who God is and how God wants us to live.

So do you see some evil situations in the world that need to be fixed? Do you see some violent actions that need to be stopped? Follow the way of Jesus in seeking to stand up to these situations and actions with truth, love, forgiveness, courage, and strength, and then see how God works to bring about peace through you.

This post was part of the July 2018 Synchroblog on the topic of Just War and Pacifism. Here are links to others who contributed this month. Go read them all!

K. W. Leslie – Just War: Vengeance Disguised as Righteousness
What God May Really Be Like – Is God a Warmonger or a Pacifist?
Layman Seeker – Disarmed and Harmonious
Tim Nichols – If you Love Sheep …
Scott Sloan – Holy War and Manifest Destiny in Light of the Cross
Done With Religion – For God and Country
Justin Steckbauer – Should Christians Fight in a War?

What a Non-Violent Atonement reveals about Scripture

CHRIST and the Six Principles of Non-Violence

Creativity.

Honesty.

Realism.

Incarnation.

Strength.

Trust.

Conclusion

It’s not Personal; it’s Just War

Rules of Just War

The Primary Problem with Just War Theory

So …. Pacifism is the Answer?

So how do we stop evil?

The Third Way

The Six Principles of Non-Violent Resistance

Theological Study Archives

Bible Study Archives

Advertise or Donate

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!