For what it's worth: in his address "Why I am not a Pacifist" (given to a society of pacifists during WWII), Lewis _does_ make reference to historical tradition pre-dating medieval times (Augustine, Paul, Jesus and John the Baptist, iirc.) Lewis' point is not that a resolution to complete non-violence (whether at the social or at the private level) is completely wrong; he simply disputes attempts by some pacifists to claim non-pacifism is completely wrong.
It would be a mistake to confuse martyrdom with the position of pacifism (though doubtless there were Christian pacifists in the first Christian centuries.) Although I don't recall Lewis making use of this argument in his address: if we believe Christ to be the Incarnation of God; and if we believe the story of the OT to be a reliable record of God's actions and judgments (to any large degree); and if we believe the canonical Gospels are largely accurate as to the sayings of Jesus; _and_ if we believe the Revelation to John should be accepted into the canon as being an inspired vision with any significant accuracy whatever... {inhale}{g}
...then we have our answer. God is _not_ a pacifist, in the sense of being committed to non-violence; and apparently doesn't require His followers to be necessarily non-violent either.
What this has to be juxtaposed with, is the witness in these same texts, that God is _working toward_ a reconciliation with, and among, _everyone_: those in the heavens as well as those below. (Per St. Paul's letter to the Colossians, among others.) That _includes_ anyone with whom He goes to war. Again, as Paul says in Colossians, this is connected directly to Christ's sacrifice on the cross: a martyrdom by a God Who wars, not for the sake of His allies, but for the sake of His enemies!--whoever and wherever they are.
This is why the Just War tradition was instituted: because people did (and among many Christians we still do) take seriously that God the martyr is also God Pantokrator, the Lord of Hosts at war.
What also must be taken seriously--and which dedicated pacifists can be excellent witnesses for--is the goal of reconciliation, and the end of war. This is even the message of the end of RevJohn where most people, even Christians, are completely unprepared to see it. (Ironically, the Christians most insistent on the final admonition not to add or omit a word of that scroll, are also most likely to completely miss the point of reconciliation toward the condemned in chapters 19 to the end; indeed to interpret those verses completely opposite to the future and hope they're actually promising.)
1 comment:
For what it's worth: in his address "Why I am not a Pacifist" (given to a society of pacifists during WWII), Lewis _does_ make reference to historical tradition pre-dating medieval times (Augustine, Paul, Jesus and John the Baptist, iirc.) Lewis' point is not that a resolution to complete non-violence (whether at the social or at the private level) is completely wrong; he simply disputes attempts by some pacifists to claim non-pacifism is completely wrong.
It would be a mistake to confuse martyrdom with the position of pacifism (though doubtless there were Christian pacifists in the first Christian centuries.) Although I don't recall Lewis making use of this argument in his address: if we believe Christ to be the Incarnation of God; and if we believe the story of the OT to be a reliable record of God's actions and judgments (to any large degree); and if we believe the canonical Gospels are largely accurate as to the sayings of Jesus; _and_ if we believe the Revelation to John should be accepted into the canon as being an inspired vision with any significant accuracy whatever... {inhale}{g}
...then we have our answer. God is _not_ a pacifist, in the sense of being committed to non-violence; and apparently doesn't require His followers to be necessarily non-violent either.
What this has to be juxtaposed with, is the witness in these same texts, that God is _working toward_ a reconciliation with, and among, _everyone_: those in the heavens as well as those below. (Per St. Paul's letter to the Colossians, among others.) That _includes_ anyone with whom He goes to war. Again, as Paul says in Colossians, this is connected directly to Christ's sacrifice on the cross: a martyrdom by a God Who wars, not for the sake of His allies, but for the sake of His enemies!--whoever and wherever they are.
This is why the Just War tradition was instituted: because people did (and among many Christians we still do) take seriously that God the martyr is also God Pantokrator, the Lord of Hosts at war.
What also must be taken seriously--and which dedicated pacifists can be excellent witnesses for--is the goal of reconciliation, and the end of war. This is even the message of the end of RevJohn where most people, even Christians, are completely unprepared to see it. (Ironically, the Christians most insistent on the final admonition not to add or omit a word of that scroll, are also most likely to completely miss the point of reconciliation toward the condemned in chapters 19 to the end; indeed to interpret those verses completely opposite to the future and hope they're actually promising.)
Jason
Post a Comment