Recently I was involved in a 6-week program put on by World Beyond War (worldbeyondwar.org) entitled Nonviolent Civilian Defense. Since I wrote about this same issue in my book entitled Standing in the Midst of Grace: Essays on Living in Christ Consciousness, I thought I would share this with you, as it loosely follows some of the ideas presented in the course.
“A modest proposal for peace: that at least the Christians of the world stop killing each other.”From a Poster.
I’m sure I am not the first to ask what our culture and our institutions might look like if Christians in the United States of America took seriously the Sermon on the Mount. Afterall, those identifying themselves as Christians comprise approximately 63% of the population, a sizable number.
To begin, the Sermon on the Mount (Mt Chapters 5-7) is the Christian Manifesto for a Gospel-centered life in Christ. In broad strokes, it outlines what it means for us to live according to the mind and heart of Christ Jesus. Now, let us presume, for example, that most US citizens, Christians included, believe in the defense of our country and the preservation of its freedoms. However, as Christians, we are charged by the Fifth commandment not to kill and are required by the teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount to love our enemies. This immediately presents Christians with a dilemma, or at least, that would be the hope. For Christians are enjoined by the above to embrace a commitment to nonviolence. How then are we to carry out obligations to our country while remaining true to the Gospel?
In light of this, I wonder what actually could be accomplished if we set our minds to the task of sorting this out. What if we began from the starting point of the Christian Manifesto and never looked back? While acknowledging the current climate of polarization, especially within Christian circles, this would be difficult; but it would also be most beneficial for Christians to begin the task of developing strategies of nonviolent civilian defense. After all, we still can agree that most desire to defend our country, but as Christians we cannot resort to violent means to do so. Period. So, what nonviolent civilian defense strategies could we devise together? What training programs would we create and how would we implement them? What help could we draw on from outside? (E.g. World Beyond War)
What if the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops got involved along with, say, the United Methodist Church General Conference, and then other conferences joined in. What if they developed study guides to help the process along? What if groups were set up in each diocese to consider these issues, and this becomes a priority.
We can only imagine how setting ourselves to this task might begin to influence other aspects of our daily lives. Would this lead us to make changes in our Christian schools? Might we begin to treat each other differently if we were considering on a regular basis how we could love our enemies and still defend our country? Would we see a need to rewrite our history books to reflect not only the use of nonviolence but also its many successes in resolving seemingly impossible situations where violence was deemed the only solution? Again, there are numerous examples of such successful actions, both in our time and in former times, and they give us great hope. And would the content of homilies change in our churches if enough Christians were involved in this endeavor? How also might our theology need to change to address the meaning of the cross and suffering in the context of nonviolent resistance, since nonviolent resistance often involves suffering? Would we be more likely to consider the difference between being “cross bearers rather than cross builders.”
This would not be an easy road. Many Christians might need to be reintroduced to the practice of civil discourse along with the principles of nonviolence and how these relate to the Christian Manifesto. A daunting task. There would surely be a broad spectrum of views represented. Major differences are a given, and the more there is at stake, the more emotions run high. The synodal process embraced by Pope Francis is a hopeful sign of how we might welcome different viewpoints, seeing them as necessary in order to leave no one out, and in the long run
to develop a stronger consensus. Still, the only pre-requisite would be a willingness to consider this particular task in light of the Gospel, at least as a starting point.
As far as addressing our differences, some of us may remember that in the late 1960’s and early 70’s how the simulation game was a very popular tool for getting people together to consider issues in a unique way. People were assigned roles representing different perspectives within a society. These games addressed a number of hot button issues such as hunger, power, race, and class. The roles players assumed were ones they might otherwise never have had a chance to experience. For example, life in the ghetto from the perspective of someone living there vs. a local politician from the suburbs. Each role had a general script; much leeway was given; and the game began. At various points, the facilitator introduced other instructions. When the game ended, there was a needed debriefing period because simulation games are devised to get participants emotionally involved, and they always did.
I both facilitated and participated in simulation games back then, and I am sorry to say that they have all but disappeared. As intense as these games could become, they were, for the most part, exciting and fun, and people gained insight into their own behavior and that of others, sometimes in shocking ways. Like simulation games, any tool that would enable us to experience what others are seeing and feeling could be helpful, especially if it could actually excite people to get involved in a more open way.
The big problem, of course, is that not only North American Christians but Christians worldwide have seldom been challenged with a task as bold as nonviolent civilian defense. Using the violent means of Caesar has been the default position of human society and culture since the rise of patriarchal civilization over 5000 years ago. Nonetheless, my sense is this task has potential to impact Christians in a number of significant ways, some of them mentioned above. It would surely involve us intellectually, spirituality, emotionally, and physically as we trained together. It could actually transform us as we go.
It's true. If we do research, we will find there are many examples of non-violent protests and movements throughout the modern world, but non-violence involves creativity and conviction and it doesn't increase capital the way our military armaments do.