Category Archives: Pacifism

“Pursue Peace”: My monthly column

Beginning with the September, 2010, issue, Purpose: Stories of Faith and Promise, which is a monthly devotional magazine published by Faith and Life Resources of the Mennonite Publishing Network, will carry a regular column by me on peace themes. The column is called “Pursue Peace,” and will engage the various themes that each issue of the magazine is focused on.

Here are links to the columns that have been published so far:

September 2010—”Rehearsals for retirement.”

October 2010—”Communion serving peace.”

November 2010—”A volunteer for Jesus.”

Is Pacifism Ever an Idol?

Ted Grimsrud (January 2010)

As a young adult in the 1970s, I found a strong sense of clarity to realize that I could never participate in war.  Then I discovered Mennonites—Christian pacifists with a strong tradition to back them up.  Then, I discovered surprising ambivalence about pacifism among Mennonites, even to the point where some Mennonites have charged that the church has made pacifism an idol.

What is in mind in this linking of pacifism with idolatry?  I think at least some of the following points may be present.  Pacifism could be seen to be an ideology, a human-centered, rigid philosophy similar to, say, Marxism or Libertarianism—and as such actually in competition with God as the center.

Or pacifism could be understood to be at best something we add to the core message of the gospel, perhaps valid in an optional kind of way but a problem when it is seen as too central.  When pacifism becomes too central it almost certainly will distract us from the main concerns of the gospel such as personal evangelism and the call to holiness.

Or pacifism could be seen to have become a badge of Mennonite identity, something that separates us from and elevates us over other Christians, an occasion for pride.

Or, finally, pacifism could be seen as making a human philosophy the basis for limiting God’s sovereignty.  With pacifism we may be telling God what God may or may not ask us to do.

I believe, though, that properly understood, Christian pacifism can never be an idol. Continue reading

Learning from the 1940 Debate about War?

Joseph Loconte, ed. The End of Illusions: Religious Leaders Confront Hitler’s Gathering Storm. Rowman and Littlefield, 2004.

“Even though you meant it for evil, God intended it for good.” These words, a paraphrase of Joseph’s finals words to his brothers in Genesis 50:20, came to mind as I read this book that Joseph Loconte, a scholar on the staff of the Heritage Foundation, put together. Loconte meant for this book to serve the rhetorical campaign American militarists are waging to garner and sustain support for the “war on terrorism.” Though these purposes are highly problematic, the book (excepting Loconte’s introduction) is actually fascinating and important—though not for the purposes indended.

Loconte has gathered an extensive collection of writings from prominent American Protestant leaders (plus one Jewish writer) who engaged in a passionate debate in 1939-41 about the role the United States should play in relation to the war being waged in Europe between the Nazis and British. The first half of the book includes pieces from those who opposed military intervention, generally on pacifist grounds; the second half gathers materials from those who supported taking sides with the British and offering material aid for the Allied cause (though, since the materials all were published before Pearl Harbor in December 1941, even these latter writings do not overtly advocate American direct military engagement).

So, we have an important resource here that sheds light on Christian perspectives during what was a momentous time in American history. Despite his present day agenda, to Loconte’s great credit the introductions to the various writings are models of objective description that do a nice job of putting the articles in historical perspective.

Continue reading

A Surprising Critique of World War II

Patrick J. Buchanan. Churchill, Hitler, and “The Unnecessary War”: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World. Crown Publishers, 2008.

This is a surprising book, at least to me. I’ve not read much of Pat Buchanan’s stuff. I know him mainly by reputation—a speechwriter for Richard Nixon, self-labeled paleo-conservative, critic of empire, quasi-isolationist, third party presidential candidate in 2000 whose candidacy would have cost George Bush the election had the votes in Florida been accurately counted. And, now, a sharp critic of America and British involvement in World War II.

Buchanan surely is not a pacifist, but there is little here that wouldn’t give the reader the impression that he leans in that direction. He does not come across as a Nazi sympathizer. He greatly dislikes Winston Churchill (with good reason) and Joseph Stalin (also with good reason). One does sense a somewhat extreme hatred of Soviet communism, but this antipathy does not come directly to the surface very often.

Buchanan is not a professional historian—a fact that probably works more in his favor than against him. It’s just that the reader must recognize that what this book gives us is a somewhat speculative essay on what didn’t have to be with numerous historical illustrations (not an exercise in careful archival research tested with professional historian peers). However, the strength of the book is the clarity of its argument which is not overly burdened with qualifications, or with careful delineation of minute arguments, or with “on the one hand/on the other hand” summaries. Certainly, Buchanan’s points need to be viewed cautiously and should stimulate further efforts on the interested reader’s part to test them against the evidence and other opinions. But that’s all to the good.

In a nutshell, Buchanan suggests that Great Britain should not have gone to war against Nazi Germany—which would have meant that the United States would not have gone to war with Germany either. If this had happened (or, rather, not happened), Germany and the Soviets would basically have ground each other to dust, the British Empire would not have disintegrated so quickly, and—probably most important for Buchanan’s purposes—the United States would not have succumbed to the hubris of striving to be the world’s one superpower and followed its current path to self-destruction.

Buchanan’s agenda is surely different than mine. As a Christian pacifist, I am pretty suspicious of Buchanan’s style of American-first patriotism. However, I am willing to walk quite a ways down the path he articulates in this book outlining the hugely problematic dynamics of the American and British participation in World War II and the disastrous consequences (for American democracy and the well-being of millions of victims of American imperialism in the past 65 years) of the aftermath of that war.

So, I am grateful to Buchanan for this stimulating and mostly well-written book. I recommend it, only now I have to figure out if I dare cite it when I try to articulate some of my critical views about World War II and its consequences.

An Anabaptist Vision for the 21st Century—Some Propositions

The process of applying the basic convictions of the Anabaptist tradition continues to engage (as it should) present day heirs of the Radical Reformation. Several years ago I was involved in an on-line conversation that resulted in the formulation of a set of “theses” meant to stimulate reflection and conversation for contemporary Anabaptists. This set of theses may be found here, entitled “An Anabaptist Vision for the 21st Century—Some Propositions.”

These ideas were circulated to a number of attendees at the 2005 Mennonite Church General Assembly, and then essentially disappeared. I just recently remembered them and decided to dust them off. In the days to come, I will be thinking about how to pursue further conversation about these theses.

Comments on this website are welcome.

The Book of Revelation as Peace Theology

Though the book of Revelation often is presented—by both those who like it and those who don’t—as a book that underwrites violence and judgment from God. There is a vigorous and growing body of scholarship and more popular exposition, though, that presents Revelation as a book that presents a basis for peacemaking and compassion. In a short article, I give a quick summary of how Revelation’s content actually points towards peace.

This article, “Victory over the powers of death and evil,” was first published in 2001. It presents a sketch for a reading strategy that counters the Revelation-underwriting-violence approaches.

Jesus’ Identity—And Ours

I continued my sermon series this morning on why we pay attention to Jesus, based on the story told in the Gospel of Luke. This sermon (the seventh out of thirteen), called “Jesus’ Identity—And Ours” (and posted here), focused on Luke 7:18-23.

Jesus began his ministry by gaining wide renown as a miracle worker and powerful teacher. He drew crowds, and as this text shows, strong, respectful interest from John the Baptist (as well as a Roman centurion and Pharisee). Luke raises the question of Jesus’ identity in the context of telling of this interest.  As John’s disciples asked him, “Are you the One to come.”

Jesus does not answer the question with a straightforward “yes” but rather answers in the affirmative by reciting the things he’s been doing, summarized with the series’ final clause: “bringing good news to the poor.” In doing so, Jesus points ahead to the big “fork in the road” at which he will arrive—where the choice is ministry by acclaim and success or ministry resistance and suffering.

Jesus, in taking the path of resistance provides a model for all his followers. We find our identity linking ourselves with God’s “preferential option for the vulnerable.”

Book Reviews

What Matters Most?

Why should we pay attention to Jesus? One reason is that Jesus brings a message of peace—challenging head on the human social dynamics that lead to violence and war.

This morning, I presented the sixth in my series of what will probably be thirteen sermons on Jesus.  The sermon was called “What Matters Most?” and focused especially on Jesus’ “Sermon on the Plane” in Luke six.

The message of the first six chapters of Luke is that Jesus brings a message of an upside-down perspective on reality where the mighty are brought down and the vulnerable are lifted up. After reiterating his message of turned-around expectations in Luke 6:20-26, Jesus deepens his challenge even more by emphasizing that the human connection with God will be found in its most profound way when we love our enemies.

But is such love of enemies realistic? The sermon concludes with the story of nonviolent action at the center of the most successful phase of the American Civil Rights movement in the early 1960s.

The Bible’s Salvation Story

One of the areas with the intense debate in recent Christian theology has been understandings of salvation. Much of the debate has focused on theories of the atonement, theologies of the cross, interpretations of theologians such as Anselm and Luther, views of the doctrines of Christian tradition.

Not so much attention has been paid to the biblical portrayals of salvation, except as viewed through the lenses of the various atonement theories. I have been working on a book that does indeed focus directly on biblical theology. I have gotten quite a bit done on this project; I am calling it: Mercy Not Sacrifice: The Bible’s Salvation Story. I mostly need yet to flesh out the chapter on salvation in the book of Revelation and to complete a concluding chapter, “Is There an Atonement Theory in This Story?”

Since I am focusing my energies elsewhere for the time being (and since I have struck out so far in my tentative attempts to find a publisher), I will post here on Peacetheology.net the manuscript as far as it has been developed.