Program / Course 22: Christian Ethics / Lesson 4.3
What you will learn
- Distinguish kinds of Christian pacifism and nonviolence.
- Describe the Anabaptist and peace church traditions and their biblical and theological reasons.
- Explain Catholic and Orthodox forms of nonviolence, including vocational pacifism.
- State the main objections to pacifism and how its defenders reply.
The big idea
Christian pacifism is the conviction that followers of Jesus are called to refuse to kill and to answer evil with love, as his teaching and example show. It takes several forms. Some pacifists reject all use of lethal force, some practice active nonviolent resistance, and some, such as Catholic and Orthodox monks and clergy, forgo arms as a vocation while allowing that others may serve. Pacifists answer the charge of irresponsibility by pointing to the cross and to nonviolent action as a serious way of seeking justice.
Key terms
- Pacifism
- A commitment to peace that rejects war, and in its stricter forms the taking of human life, as a means of settling conflict.
- Nonresistance
- A term used by some Anabaptists for refusing to resist evil by force, based on Matthew 5:39, while accepting suffering.
- Nonviolent resistance
- Active opposition to injustice by means such as boycott, strike, civil disobedience and public witness, without harming opponents.
- Historic peace churches
- The Mennonites, the Church of the Brethren and the Quakers (Religious Society of Friends), who have held pacifism as a church teaching since the Reformation era or after.
- Vocational pacifism
- The view that some people, such as clergy and monks, are called to forgo force, even though others in different callings may bear arms.
- Conscientious objector
- A person who refuses military service on grounds of conscience.
- Schleitheim Confession
- A statement of 1527 by Swiss Anabaptists that rejects the sword and oaths for Christians.
Background
Pacifists point first to the teaching and example of Jesus: love of enemies (Matthew 5:44), turning the other cheek (Matthew 5:39), the command to Peter to put up his sword (Matthew 26:52), and his refusal of violence before Pilate and on the cross. They point to Paul’s instruction not to repay evil for evil but to overcome evil with good (Romans 12:17-21), and to the statements of early writers who opposed Christian bloodshed. The previous lesson showed that the early evidence is disputed.
In the Middle Ages, groups such as the Waldensians and some who followed John Wyclif and Peter Chelcicky questioned war. In the sixteenth century the Swiss Brethren, who were Anabaptists, rejected the sword, and were persecuted by Catholic and Protestant authorities alike. Out of this movement came the Mennonites, named after Menno Simons, and the Hutterites. The Quakers arose in England in the seventeenth century, and the Church of the Brethren in Germany in the eighteenth. Their witness has been carried by communities that suffered for it.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: Anabaptist and peace church pacifism
The Schleitheim Confession (1527) says that the sword is outside the perfection of Christ and that Christians are not to use it, serve as magistrates or swear oaths. Menno Simons wrote that Christ’s followers are children of peace who have beaten swords into plowshares. This tradition understands the church as a visible community that lives by the Sermon on the Mount, as a witness that stands apart from the state. Faithfulness, not effectiveness, is the measure.
The Quakers, from George Fox on, stated in 1660 that they utterly denied all outward wars and strife with outward weapons, for any end or under any pretense. They have often been conscientious objectors and have served as ambulance drivers and relief workers. Mennonites and Brethren have developed service organizations, such as the Mennonite Central Committee, that work in disaster relief and development. In the twentieth century, the theologian John Howard Yoder, a Mennonite, argued in The Politics of Jesus that Jesus’ cross shows a distinct social ethic of nonviolent love, and that the church is called to be a model of that ethic. His work influenced many, and his legacy is complicated by revelations of his abusive behavior toward women, which is widely acknowledged in discussions of his writing.
Step 2: Active nonviolence
In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Christian nonviolence took on public form. Leo Tolstoy, drawing on the Sermon on the Mount, wrote against war and the state, influencing Gandhi, who in turn influenced Martin Luther King Jr. King, a Baptist minister, held that nonviolent resistance is not passive but seeks to win the opponent by moral force, and he led the civil rights movement in the United States by marches, boycotts and sit-ins. Dorothy Day, a Catholic, co-founded the Catholic Worker movement, which has practiced pacifism and service to the poor. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran, was at one time drawn to pacifism, and later joined a plot against Hitler, a case which pacifists and just war thinkers each read in their own way.
Nonviolent movements have been studied by political scientists such as Erica Chenoweth, who has argued from data that nonviolent campaigns have often succeeded more than violent ones in recent decades. The evidence is debated, and critics note that nonviolence relies on opponents who can be moved or who are subject to public pressure. Pacifists respond that fidelity matters even where success is uncertain.
Step 3: Catholic and Orthodox variants
The Catholic Church does not teach that all Christians must be pacifists, but it honors nonviolence. The Catechism says that those who renounce violence and bloodshed and use means of defense available to the weak bear witness to evangelical charity (paragraph 2306). The church recognizes conscientious objection and holds that laws should provide for it (Gaudium et Spes 79). Clergy and religious are barred from bearing arms, a form of vocational pacifism going back to the early church. Pax Christi, a Catholic peace movement, and individuals such as Franz Jagerstatter, an Austrian who refused to serve in Hitler’s army and was executed in 1943, and later beatified, show Catholic witnesses. Pope John Paul II and later popes have praised nonviolence, and the Vatican held a conference in 2016 that reexamined the church’s view of just war and nonviolence.
In Orthodoxy, monks and priests do not shed blood, and canon law, including a canon attributed to Basil, requires penance of those who have killed even in war. Orthodox saints include those who answered violence with forgiveness, such as the martyrs who prayed for their killers, and Seraphim of Sarov, who is said to have refused to harm bandits who beat him. Some Orthodox writers today stress that the church’s vision is peace, and a few support pacifism more broadly, though the church as a whole accepts a lawful defense.
Step 4: Objections and replies
Critics raise serious objections. The most common is that pacifism leaves the innocent undefended: if a person may not use force against an attacker, a child may die. Pacifists answer that Christians are called to love both victim and attacker, that there are many nonviolent ways to protect and to resist, and that those who refuse to kill must be willing to suffer in the place of the victim. Reinhold Niebuhr argued in the mid-twentieth century that pacifism is irresponsible because it ignores the structure of power in a fallen world and refuses the tragic choices that responsible leaders must make. Pacifists reply that the cross is itself the answer to the logic of power.
Others say that Romans 13 shows that the state is ordained to wield the sword, and that Jesus’ commands apply to personal relations. Pacifists reply that Romans 13 describes what God permits and uses, not what Christians are to do, and that the same chapter follows a command not to take revenge (Romans 12:19). Both sides appeal to Scripture and to tradition, and the dispute remains open among serious Christians.
- What does this form of pacifism refuse: all lethal force, war, service in government or only some actions?
- Is it a rule for all Christians, a calling for some or a witness of the church as a community?
- How does it read Romans 13, and how does it read Matthew 5?
- How does it answer the case of a child threatened by an attacker?
- What does it ask of a person in practice, and what does it cost?
- What does the just war tradition share with this view, and where does it differ?
Examples
A conscientious objector
A young Mennonite man is called up for military service in a nation at war. He asks for status as a conscientious objector and serves instead in a hospital or a farm. His neighbors disagree about whether he is a coward or a man of principle. His church says that his choice is a form of service and witness. (A constructed example.)
Franz Jagerstatter
Jagerstatter, an Austrian farmer and Catholic, refused in 1943 to take the oath to Hitler and to serve in the army. His parish priest and bishop advised him that he could serve with a good conscience. He refused and was executed. The church has since beatified him, which shows respect for his conscience, while it has not taught that all Catholics must act as he did.
Nonviolent action
In the Montgomery bus boycott of 1955 and 1956, thousands of Black residents walked rather than ride segregated buses, led by pastors including King. They held mass meetings with prayer and hymns and refused retaliation despite violence against them. The case is often cited as an example of the power of nonviolent action, though it also involved legal action and wider events.
Different perspectives
Anabaptist and peace church
Mennonites, Brethren and Quakers teach that following Christ means rejecting violence, that the church is a community distinct from the state, and that the way of the cross, not effectiveness, is the measure of faithfulness. They deny that they are irresponsible, citing service and peacemaking. They differ among themselves on how far to take part in government and politics.
Catholic
The Catholic Church holds that pacifism is a legitimate witness for individuals and a calling for clergy and religious, and honors nonviolence, but does not teach that it is required of all, since public authorities have the duty of defense. Recent popes have emphasized the power of nonviolence and the need for a presumption against force. Catholic pacifists, such as members of Pax Christi and the Catholic Worker, hold that the Gospel demands more.
Orthodox
Orthodox tradition holds that clergy may not shed blood, requires penance of those who have killed in war, and holds up saints of forgiveness. It does not teach pacifism as the duty of all and accepts defensive war as a tragic necessity. Some Orthodox theologians have written in favor of nonviolence, and the church’s liturgy constantly prays for peace.
Mainline and evangelical Protestant
Most Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, Methodist and Baptist churches hold just war as official teaching while allowing conscientious objection and honoring peacemakers. King and many mainline leaders drew on nonviolence. Reinhold Niebuhr argued that pacifism fails to take account of power and sin. Many individual evangelicals and mainline Christians identify as pacifists.
Secular and scholarly
Secular thinkers discuss pacifism as a position in moral philosophy and as a strategy in political science. Some defend absolute pacifism on grounds of the value of life, others criticize it for allowing wrongs to go unresisted. Studies of nonviolent campaigns, such as Chenoweth’s, are discussed, while others question their method or their general lessons.
Why it matters
Pacifism raises questions that every Christian has to answer, whatever the answer: how to read the teaching of Jesus, how to protect the vulnerable, how to love enemies and what it costs to be faithful. Even those who reject pacifism can learn from the practice of its witnesses, and even pacifists must face the hard cases that critics raise. The best conversation takes both seriously.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: Pacifists are passive and do nothing about injustice.
Correction: Many pacifists have been active in resistance, relief work and peacemaking, and some have suffered imprisonment and death for it. Nonviolence as practiced by King and Day was a form of action.
Misunderstanding: All Christian pacifists share the same position.
Correction: Some reject only war, some all force, some stand apart from government and some take part in public life. Catholic and Orthodox vocational pacifism differs from the Anabaptist view.
Misunderstanding: Pacifists do not care about victims.
Correction: Pacifists argue that love of victim and aggressor are both required and that nonviolent action may protect victims. They also accept risk to themselves. Whether this is enough is the heart of the debate.
Misunderstanding: Just war thinkers do not value peace.
Correction: The just war tradition places peace as the goal of war and holds a presumption against force. It differs from pacifism on whether force can ever be a form of love.
Knowledge check
Name the historic peace churches and one belief they share.
They are the Mennonites, the Church of the Brethren and the Quakers. They share the conviction that Christ’s teaching forbids Christians from taking part in war and killing, and that the church is called to witness to the way of peace and love of enemies.
What is vocational pacifism?
It is the view that some people, especially clergy and monastics, are called to forgo arms, even though others in different roles may serve. Catholic and Orthodox traditions bar clergy from bearing arms and require penance of those who have killed in war.
What was Niebuhr’s objection to pacifism?
He argued that pacifism ignores the realities of power and sin, and that responsible people must sometimes make tragic choices to use force to restrain greater evil. He held that perfect love is an ideal that cannot be fully realized in politics. Pacifists reply that the cross is the Christian answer to power.
How do pacifists read Romans 13?
They hold that Paul describes how God uses the state to restrain evil, not that Christians are called to wield the sword. They point out that the previous chapter commands believers not to take revenge and to overcome evil with good. Just war readers hold that the text approves the state’s use of force.
Think it through
- What would you do if a child you loved were attacked? How does that answer relate to the teaching of Jesus?
- What is the strongest point of the pacifist position, and what is the strongest objection?
- How might a church honor both pacifists and soldiers in its own membership?
- Does the case of Bonhoeffer help or complicate the question?
Independent assignment
Listening to a pacifist witness
In your notebook, write 400 to 600 words. Read about one Christian pacifist or nonviolent witness, such as Menno Simons, Dorothy Day, King or Jagerstatter, using at least two sources. Summarize the reasons the person gave, in their own terms, and describe the cost. Then state the strongest objection a just war thinker would raise and how the witness or the tradition might reply. Do not send this to anyone or post it anywhere.
Further study
- Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity Read the sections on the Radical Reformation and the Anabaptists.
- Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church Read the paragraphs on peace, conscientious objection and nonviolence.
- Timothy (Kallistos) Ware, The Orthodox Church Read selectively on the Orthodox attitude to war and peace.
- John Cassian, The Conferences Read selectively to see how monks described the renunciation of anger.
- Matthew 5:39 Resist not evil.
- Romans 12:21 Overcome evil with good.
- Isaiah 2:4 Swords into plowshares.
- 1 Peter 2:21 Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example.