Category: Pondering Peace
Following Jesus in Times of War
We are in the liminal period of a fragile ceasefire between the United States military and that of Iran. President Trump began Easter morning with threats to blow up all of Iran’s power plants and bridges. By Tuesday, he had escalated his warnings to saying a “whole civilization will die tonight,” if Iran did not meet his demands. To accomplish such a feat of annihilation, this threat implied the use of nuclear weapons. I spent Tuesday experiencing a restless anxiety under this ominous threat as the world waited for the designated strike time to come. I had called my Senators and Representative with the urgent request that they do whatever they could to stop President Trump, and had asked others to do the same. What else could we do except wait?
An hour and a half before the deadline, the President agreed to a two-week ceasefire. Negotiations so far have not been successful. The president has engaged in distracting us, once by posting an AI generated picture of himself in the role of Jesus performing healing miracles against the backdrop of fighter jets and an American flag. Meanwhile, the march towards war again continues. A military blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, thousands more troops heading for the Middle East for a possible ground operation, and recent publicity regarding automatic draft registration for eligible men all add gravity to the situation, as we wait to see what will happen next.
War is never a good way to deal with conflicts. War devastates everything. We have seen this happen in Gaza over the last couple years until the country has been reduced to rubble and people are desperate in simply trying to survive. War traumatizes a whole people and especially the youngest generation. It destroys homes, cities, and cultures. It kills and injures. It exacerbates violence and escalates it in endless cycles of revenge. It destroys the land, poisons the earth, and releases pollution into the air. And in the end, it does not solve the problem, but rather only makes it more difficult to find a solution. Even when there is seemingly a military victory through overpowering devastation, war’s violence sows the seeds for future conflict and violence.
For the first few centuries of Christianity, the early Church Fathers resolutely stood against Christians participating in war. That is, the ones closest to the time of Jesus, some who knew people who had known the Apostles, and for longer than the United States has even existed, all rejected war. Clement of Alexandria (150-214 CE) wrote, “We Christians are a peaceful race… for it is not in war, but in peace, that we are trained.” Tertullian (160-220 CE) wrote, “Shall it be held lawful to make 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?” “Christ, in disarming Peter, disarmed every soldier.” Further he wrote, “First, can a believer enlist in the military? Second, can any soldier, even those of the rank and file or lesser grades who neither engage in pagan sacrifices nor capital punishment, be admitted into the church? No, on both accounts.” Origin (185-254 CE) wrote, “We do not go forth as soldiers with the Emperor even if he demands this.” Although the inability to serve two masters – both God and the emperor – and the requirement of emperor worship among those of higher rank are mentioned, it was primarily the prohibition against killing and Jesus’ command to love our enemies that undergirded the early Christians’ refusal to participate in war. They stood by their refusal to serve as soldiers even when it resulted in their being martyred.
In 312 CE, Emperor Constantine had a vision or dream of the cross leading him into military victory. His subsequent recognition of Christianity as a legitimate religion led to it being protected rather than persecuted. As the empire became more Christianized, the church’s commitment to nonviolence and nonparticipation in war began to waver. Augustine developed a “just war theory” based on natural law and human reasoning as a guide for when war can legitimately be engaged in to restore order. It is of note that in doing so, he based it on the classical philosophers of his time, especially Cicero, rather than on the teachings of Jesus. In the process, he relegated Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount teaching to interior attitudes, resulting in his view that Christians can participate in war and even kill, as long as love is maintained in their hearts. In his way of thinking, such love even motivates Christian participation in war. Madeline Kasper explains his viewpoint, “The Christian love of neighbor permits the use of force for defensive purposes, but love of enemy requires limits on the use of force needed to protect the neighbor. In Christian moral theology, all individual violence committed against human life entails misery of the self, and even justified violence should be exercised with a woeful spirit.”
In just war theory, guiding principles defining when a war is just include that there is a just cause due to severe wrongdoing, that there is a public declaration of war that gives time to negotiate another solution, that the declaration of war is given by the nation’s authorized authority, that it is last resort after all other means have been tried, that its objective is just in seeking peace, that there is a limit on violence that is proportional to the wrong done or the good to be attained, and that the war is fought by just means, discriminating between combatants and noncombatants so that noncombatants are protected. Much of the church has accepted just war theory as defining its stance on war through the centuries until recently. However, now biblical scholars and nonviolence practitioners and researchers have enlarged our understanding of Jesus’ teachings on nonviolence and their relevance for today.
In his book Jesus Christ Peace Maker: A New Theology of Peace, Terrence Rynne indicates that although just war theory is not specifically Christian, it is useful in that it offers a rational way to talk about war in dialogue with people of good will who may not be followers of Jesus. In fact, just war theory was utilized in the development of the Geneva conventions and international rules of engagement in war. These aim to reduce the barbarity of war by protecting from attack people not involved in the fighting, such medics, aid workers, and civilians, and also those no longer able to fight, such as those who are sick, wounded, shipwrecked, or prisoners of war. Just war theory does not fully express what is required of those who follow Jesus during times of war, but it does provide a baseline for common understandings on how to minimize violence and increase justice in the launching and conduct of war.
In our current wartime situation, while claiming to be Christians and to have divine approval for war, the United States President/Commander-in-Chief and Secretary of War seem to have little regard of the guardrails of just war theory and the Geneva Conventions related to them. They have imperial ambitions to be gained through military violence, lack the moral compass to restrain themselves, appear to have little regard for the value of human life, and promote a twisted religion that glorifies violence under the guise of Christianity. Like Netanyahu in Gaza and Lebanon, they have ordered attacks resulting in the deaths of thousands of civilians, including children. Targeting civilian infrastructure can itself be considered a war crime. The Secretary of War has expressed contempt for rules of engagement. The veiled threat to use nuclear weapons to annihilate a whole country clearly conveys a disregard for the Geneva Conventions, and is an incredibly risky threat. With nuclear weapons on hair trigger alert in many countries and their capacity to destroy all of human civilization and much of the earth, it is completely irresponsible to imply they may be used.
The alarming situation in which we find ourselves should hopefully stiffen our resolve to oppose this war and every war, as well as the stockpiling of nuclear weapons to be used as deterrence by mutually assured destruction. Our world is too small, too interconnected, and too fragile for war, when warfare can be waged as it can be today. As followers of Jesus, I believe we are called to oppose this war in whatever way we can. We must not give into a patriotism that requires support for war. We must keep voicing opposition. We need to take to heart the words of the early Church Fathers and remove that form of Christian nationalism in our churches that promotes military service. Instead we need to support our young people in seeking conscientious objector status, should the draft be reinstated. We need to hear once again Christ’s call to love our enemies, to put away our weapons, and to be willing to defend our neighbor, not through violence, but by following Jesus’ example of loving, nonviolent action.
Rev. Ruth Rosell, Ph.D.
Director of the Buttry Center for Peace and Nonviolence
Associate Professor of Pastoral Theology Emerita
Central Seminary, Overland Park, KS
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.
Image from https://www.azquotes.com/quote/595787