FROM
BIBLICAL NONRESISTANCE
TO "PEACE"
Editorial
March/April, 1999
Volume 34, Number 2
It is necessary to be reminded again of basic New Testament teaching
for the Christian. The Sermon on the Mount is not rigid law, but rather
is a description of the believer's life in following Jesus Christ. The
Sermon is for Christians, not pagans. "Our Lord never asks a natural man,
the dupe of sin and Satan, and under the dominion of Hell, to live a life
like this, for he cannot," wrote Martin Lloyd-Jones.
-
War is a result of sin (James 4:1). The purpose of the military
is "to kill people and break things." The armed forces are not educational
institutions, international relief agencies, or social engineering models.
Armies are just large manifestations of the evil that lurks in human hearts,
and of the great force that is necessary to keep that evil in check.
-
Christ stated that wars would continue until His return.
Christians will not outlaw conflicts or cause wars to cease. It is the
height of naivete to think that Christians, by political action, will change
the evil hearts of human beings so that they will not war.
-
The Christian is not of this world (John 18:36), but is a
citizen of Heaven. We should be cautious about involving ourselves in politics,
and by extension, involving ourselves in human conflicts. The world's method's
are not our methods (2 Corinthians 10:3-4).
-
Christians want people to be saved. Our interest is in the
spiritual outcome of souls involved. This should cause us to redouble our
efforts to present the Gospel to all who will hear. We indeed fight a battle,
but it is a spiritual one (Ephesians 6:11-18).
-
We recognize the legitimate use of force (police, armed forces)
to contain evildoers (Romans 13), but we maintain that the Christian is
not to participate in these activities (Romans 12). The only reason, ultimately,
for the Christian not to participate in the military or war is that Jesus
Christ forbids him to do so. This means that war is permitted for civil
government.
-
We recognize the proper role of government (1 Peter 2:12-17).
The government is in place to make and enforce just laws for the harmony
of unregenerate society. Christians ought to be the best subjects a ruler
should have, and every Christian should be in prayer for our rulers.
--Craig Alan Myers
From Biblical Nonresistance to "Peace"
by Mark A. Ray
Amidst the modern pleas for "diversity" and "inclusiveness" can be heard
the faint whispers of the Brethren past calling forth for "distinctiveness"
and "nonconformity." The greater the push for diversification in our beliefs
and inclusiveness of all people regardless of their beliefs or lifestyles,
the more our Brethren heritage and doctrinal standards fade into history.
A church cannot remain distinct in anything if it seeks to adopt and welcome
everything.
Such has been the general fate of such Brethren ideals as nonconformity,
non-litigation, and non-swearing. While many in the Brotherhood still
hold to these New Testament teachings, the broader denomination has neglected
them. Despite history's recollection of the Brethren as a "Historic
Peace Church," current trends toward openness and inclusiveness in addition
to the successful acculturation of the Brethren to American society and
mainstream Protestantism have eroded the Brethren teachings on biblical
nonresistance. The doctrine of nonresistance is a core Brethren belief
that has undergone considerable transition in thought and practice, resulting
in a peace position that is only a shadow of biblical nonresistance.
Nonresistance Defined
Matthew 5, a portion of the Sermon on the Mount, contains a great discourse
of Jesus on the subject of nonresistance. He taught about revenge,
obedience, and love.
Regarding vengeance, Jesus said, "Do not resist an evil person.
If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.
And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your
cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with
him two miles" (Matthew 5:39-41, NIV). The Apostle Paul warns, "Do
not repay anyone evil for evil. Do not take revenge, my friends,
but leave room for God's wrath" (Romans 12:17, 19, NIV). The
words of Jesus and the teachings of Paul were in complete contrast
to the sentiment of the world around them, for their world was one of self-defense
and retaliation, not unlike our own. An "eye for an eye and a tooth
for a tooth" was the accepted view. Jesus ushered in a new covenant
and a new way of living. For the believer, the right to retaliate or take
revenge does not exist. Instead, Jesus taught His followers to turn
the other cheek, go the second mile, pray for their persecutors, and resist
not an evil person.
Regarding obedience, the believer is called by Christ to be a
peacemaker (Matthew 5:9), and one who "lives peaceably with all men"
(Romans 12:18). This simple commandment has far-reaching implications
that range beyond war and peace and turning the other cheek. Living
at peace with a neighbor, for example, would include such New Testament
practices as non-litigation, nonviolence, and even non-political involvement,
as well as acts of kindness, compassion, and forgiveness. In a Christian
home, abuse and divorce would be absent, and training in the Word of God
would be present. Living at peace with our brothers and sisters in the
church would require biblical reconciliation as taught by Jesus in Matthew
18:15-17. However, living in peace with men everywhere would never
require the church to live at peace with the world and its pattern.
Regarding love, Jesus said, "A new commandment I give to you,
that you love one another" (John 13:34). His radically different
teachings included the admonishment to "love your enemies, and bless those
who curse you" (Matthew 5:44). Paul reminds the church that "love
does no harm to a neighbor" (Romans 13:10). When love
that is of Christ fills the life of the believer, there is no room for
enmity, revenge, violence, or murder. These things become foreign
to the believer who earnestly seeks to be at peace with God and man.
These New Testament Scriptures played an important role in the development
of a nonresistant lifestyle among the earliest Anabaptists and Pietists.
The principal ideas of these groups included a return to the New Testament,
imitating the ethics of Jesus, and, of course, reading the Bible.
Nonresistant themes have often been pursued by sects seeking to imitate
primitive Christianity as modeled by the apostolic Church. Among
these groups were the Waldenses and the Unity of Brethren.
Nonresistance continued to be affirmed through such Anabaptist statements
as the Schleitheim Confession of Faith prepared by the Swiss Brethren in
1527. This confession stated that a Christian could not be a magistrate
or one who was responsible for passing judgment and executing sentences
in worldly disputes. The use of the sword for punishment and protection
was viewed as necessary outside of the perfect will of Christ, but it had
no place in the church.
Anabaptists taught a "Two Kingdoms" view in which there was a
separation of the Kingdom of God (the church) and the kingdoms of man (governments).
At the time of the Radical Reformation, church and state were united, and
the thought of their separation was almost unimaginable. Such, too,
was the case in Germany at the time the Brethren began to emerge.
Some of the differences between the church and state in this theory are
explained as follows.
The Church:
-
is spiritual
-
operates by love
-
has Christ as her Head
-
must proclaim the Gospel
|
The State
-
is political
-
operates by force
-
has a king/president as head
-
must maintain order
|
It is the state's prerogative to wage war and not the church's role.
Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were
of this world, my servants would fight" (John 18:36). When the laws
of man differ from the laws of God, the believer should choose obedience
to God and be willing to accept the consequences of such a choice.
Historical accounts of Mennonites, Quakers, Hutterites, and Brethren detail
their willingness to suffer imprisonment and even death rather than disobey
the teachings of the New Testament. The Christian, therefore, lives
under the greater authority of God and should not choose to go to war.
Following the examples of Anabaptists and Pietists before them, the
early Brethren sought to restore the primitive church. Alexander
Mack described the young Brethren movement as a simple group seeking to
return to the "old church" founded by Christ. Mack's views on war
were formed through study in the Scriptures, a desire to return to the
purity of the church, and a lifetime of tragic war experiences. These
experiences, coupled with New Testament teachings, created among the Brethren
a sincere desire to live nonresistant lives.
The early Brethren sought to separate themselves from the sinful nature
of the world around them, and their doctrine of nonresistance began to
solidify. They were not only taught to refuse to bear arms, but they
were instructed to avoid using any force or violence at all. They avoided
initiating litigation, because it usually meant pursuing one's own interest
by "legally" forcing the other party. They refrained from interpersonal
violence such as quarreling and abuse and rebuked members who participated
in such lifestyles. They refused to vote in political elections,
because it was the government that initiated force to maintain order.
They chose not to serve in law enforcement or political office for the
same reason.
Development of Nonresistance in Times of War
The Brethren remained nonresistant even in the face of savagery and
war. In 1777 and 1780, Brethren families were massacred by Indians
at Morrison's Cove, Pennsylvania. Christopher Sauer, Jr., lost his
possessions as a result of his nonresistant stance during the American
War of Independence.
In 1775, a joint petition authored by both Mennonites and Brethren was
sent to the Pennsylvania Assembly thanking God for the liberty of conscience
for those "persuaded in their conscience to love their enemies, and resist
not evil . . . " They presented their intent not to bear arms but
offer assistance to the needy. They emphasized their willingness
to pay taxes and give humanitarian assistance but not bear arms in conflict.
At the 1780 Annual Meeting at Conestoga, Brethren were admonished not to
pay the substitute fee to hire someone to serve in their place, for this
was considered direct participation in the war effort. Annual
Meeting declared in 1790, "Should there be anyone among us having such
a conscience as to be able to fight and swear oaths, such a one would not
be of us."
The Brethren remained steadfast and unified in their nonresistant determination
through the wars of 1812 with England and 1845 with Mexico. Heavy fines
were levied on those Brethren who refused military conscription. The Annual
Meeting of 1815 encouraged the weight of these fines to be carried by the
entire congregation. In 1822, Brethren were discouraged from "marching
at the muster grounds" and attending Independence Day celebrations.
The first statement on the use of a weapon for self-defense was released
in 1855.
The unity and steadfastness of the Brethren continued during the Civil
War. Participation in war remained a test of membership.
It was at the 1864 Meeting that another statement concerning war was prepared
and recorded in the minutes of the church:
"We exhort the Brethren to steadfastness in the faith -- and especially
to our nonresistant principle, a principle dear to every subject of the
Prince of Peace, and a prominent doctrine of our fraternity, and to endure
whatever sufferings and to make whatever sacrifice the maintaining of the
principle may require, and not to encourage in any way the practice of
war . . . . "
The progression of the doctrine of nonresistance can be summed up in
the following statements:
1. Nonresistance is one element of the Biblical teaching on separation
from the world.
2. There is a definite separation of church and state according
to the Bible.
3. Because the church and state belong to different kingdoms,
the methods for defense and offense are also different.
4. Physical violence is forbidden to believers as a method of
operation for any purpose.
5. The church has no right to use physical violence in the propagation
of Christianity.
6. It is a breach of order for the church to join with the world
in the exercise of physical force.
7. Since physical force is forbidden to the believer as a means
to an end, he is always obligated to exercise spiritual means to do good
and to bring blessing to others.
Later Developments
Following the Civil War, the Brethren took steps to move out of their
cultural and spiritual isolationism and gradually began to move toward
acculturation. They began to experiment with social and Protestant movements
that were gaining in popularity. Many of the cultural distinctives
began to fade out of Brethren life, resulting in division in 1881
and the loss of the Old Orders who desired to maintain Brethren distinctives.
By the time of World War I, the Brethren had experienced a radical change
toward "Americanization" and many were uncomfortable with their peculiarities
which had separated them. Innovations such as Sunday Schools, salaried
ministers, and voting in government elections were commonplace in the church.
Nationalism began to flourish, and "constructive patriotism" became a theme
of the church. When the United States was ushered into war, there
had been over twenty years of silence on peace and war at Annual Meetings.
A strong statement on nonparticipation in war was adopted by the special
Goshen Conference in 1918, but it was withdrawn under threat from the government.
The 1935 Annual Conference declared that "all war is sin; it is wrong
for Christians to support or engage in it." However, by 1939, Conference
added that for those who choose to participate in war, "the attitude of
the church toward such should be one of brotherly love and forbearance,
endeavoring by faithful teaching to restore him as long as he expresses
desire to continue membership in the Church of the Brethren." A unified
stance on traditional nonresistance was rejected in 1939 as participation
in war no longer was a test of church membership. During World War
II, only twenty percent of the Brethren drafted for military service took
the conscientious objector position, while most Brethren entered the armed
forces.
The transformation of the doctrine of nonresistance was practically
completed in 1948 when the Conference ruled that the church would seek
to maintain fellowship with all who sincerely follow the guidance of their
consciences.
Official denominational statements gradually shifted the church toward
a more secular and even militant pacifism. Author Donald Fitzkee
describes this shift: "While statements prior to World War I had primarily
urged nonparticipation, during the world wars, church position papers increasingly
advocated positive peacemaking efforts. Official statements during
the Vietnam era took the Brethren one step further: Not only were
Brethren to promote peace; increasingly the church called on its members
to actively oppose war in Vietnam."
Nonresistance and Pacifism Contrasted
Today, organizations such as On Earth Peace Assembly, Peace Studies
at Manchester College, Brethren Colleges Abroad, and Christian Citizenship
Seminar seek to promote the "peace position" of the church and strengthen
the "social justice witness." Despite new efforts at promoting a
peace witness, most Brethren (nearly two-thirds) would either enter regular
military service or noncombatant military service if faced with a draft.
Only one-third would maintain the historical Brethren premise that it is
wrong to help in any war by fighting. Arguably, a complete transformation
had taken place, and the differences between biblical nonresistance and
today's secular pacifism stand in stark contrast of one another when compared
side by side.
| Biblical Nonresistance
1. Thinks in terms of individual peace with God, with peace among
the nations coming only when men submit to the rule of Christ.
2. Sees failure in any attempt to effect a permanent reformation of
human nature apart from God's grace.
3. Refuses to participate in military service because such service
conflicts with the new nature received in Christ.
4. Believes his allegiance is to the higher kingdom which forbids
his involvement in earthly government.
5. Has a passive interest only in the activities of state and
makes no effort to influence international diplomacy.
6. Considers himself a pilgrim and stranger here and gives priority
to citizenship in God's kingdom.
7. Regards war as an inevitable and recurring evil so long as
the heart of man is not at peace with God through the blood of His son.
8. Works primarily to bring people in the world into peace with
God.
9. Believes in a complete separation of church and state.
10. Sees no way to realize a worldwide friendly society without
the work of intervening grace and divine power.
11. Primarily concerned with preaching the Gospel which is the
'power of God unto salvation', and with spreading the teachings of Christ.
12. Works for spiritual regeneration in the life of
the individual through the new birth, and for the establishment of a Christian
society within the church. |
Secular Pacifism
1. Thinks in terms of effecting
peace among the nations.
2. Has confidence in an evolutionary process of mankind through human
achievement.
3. Opposes war because it conflicts with its ideology.
4. The ideal of a political order embracing international law
and order requires participation in political activities.
5. Has an active interest in administering the affairs of the
state motivated by the desire to influence policies.
6. Considers itself responsible for working for a just world order.
7. Urges disarmament as a step toward abolition of war.
8. Works directly for international peace.
9. Promotes legislation to accomplish ends.
10. Hopes to achieve ends through education and legislation.
11. Concerned with the use of various types of propaganda to accomplish
its purposes.
12. Often ignores the necessity of regeneration and works
for the reconstruction of society through social reform. |
(John Mumma,
Vital Differences.)
In short, biblical nonresistance supports separation from the world,
while the peace position supports a moral, global community, without regard
for the regenerating power of Christ.
While it is true that the Church of the Brethren officially does not
require nonresistance as a test for membership, some congregations still
have such requirements and expectations of their members. Both the
Old Order German Baptists and the Dunkard Brethren still maintain nonresistance
as a test of membership.
It is difficult to imagine how such a radical transformation of such
a central doctrine of the church could have taken place. Is such
an evolution an inevitable response of a church influenced by culture and
changing gradually with time? Or did the change take place as a result
of snowballing compromises?
Either way, the doctrine has changed and absolute truth has been forgotten.
The church cannot expect to maintain a distinctive nonresistant witness--or
any witness for that matter--if current trends toward inclusiveness and
diversity continue. A group cannot be both diverse in acceptance
of all faiths and religious ideas and distinct or dogmatic on one particular
issue. The core Brethren doctrine of biblical nonresistance has undergone
a considerable transformation.
Every last Brethren ideal that may still exist is in danger of the same
fate. It is time for the Brethren to once again "count well the cost"
of biblical nonresistance with the tenacity and obedience displayed by
those who laid the foundations of our church upon the teachings of Jesus
in the New Testament. That is where true peace will be found.
Mark A. Ray is youth pastor of the Blue
River Church of the Brethren
in the Northern Indiana District.