Top Ten Quotes on Christian Nonviolence

The Gospel and Nonviolence

“When people with power see things happen of which they disapprove, they drop bombs and send in tanks.  When people without power see things of which they disapprove, they smash store windows, blow themselves up in crowded places, and fly planes into buildings.  The fact that both methods have proved remarkably unsuccessful at changing things doesn’t stop people from going on in the same way.  On the cross the living God took the fury and violence of the world onto himself, suffering massive injustice–the biblical writers are careful to highlight this–and yet refusing to lash out with threats or curses.  Part of what Christians have called “atonement theology” is the belief that in some sense or other Jesus exhausted the underlying power of evil when he died under its weight, refusing to pass it on or keep it in circulation.  Jesus’s resurrection is the beginning of a world in which a new type of justice is possible.  Through the hard work of prayer, persuasion, and political action, it is possible to make governments on the one hand and revolutionary groups on the other see that there is a different approach than unremitting violence, than fighting force with force.” – N.T. Wright^[1]Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense (San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco, 2006).

“Christian non-violence is nothing if not first of all a formal profession of faith in the Gospel message that the Kingdom has been established and that the Lord of truth is indeed risen and reigning over his Kingdom, defending the deepest values of those who dwell in it.  Faith of course tells us that we live in a time of eschatological struggle, facing a fierce combat which marshals all the forces of evil and darkness against the still invisible truth, yet this combat is already decided by the victory of Christ over death and over sin.  The Christian can renounce the protection of violence and risk being humble, therefore vulnerable, not because he trusts in the supposed efficacy of a gentle and persuasive tactic that will disarm hatred and tame cruelty, but because he believes that the hidden power of the Gospel is demanding to be manifested in and through his own poor person.” – Thomas Merton^[2]Faith and Violence: Christian Teaching and Christian Practice (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1968), page 18.

“The gospel does not only imply an ethic of peacemaking or being set at peace, nor does it merely lead  to a nonviolent lifestyle.  It proclaims a reconciled view of the world. . . That is the gospel – not that war is sin.  That also is true, but alone it would not be the gospel.  The gospel is that war is over.  Not merely that you ought to love your enemy.  Not merely that if you have had a “born-again experience,” some of your hate feelings will go away and you maybe can love.  Not merely that if you deal with your enemies lovingly enough, some of them will become friendly.  All of that is true, but it is not the gospel.  The gospel is that everyone being loved by God must be my beloved too, even if they consider me their enemy, even if their interests clash with mine.” – John Howard Yoder^[3]He Came Preaching Peace (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1985).

“The reasons for choosing Jesus’ way of peacemaking are not prudential.  In calculable terms, this way is sheer folly.  Why do we choose the way of nonviolent love of enemies?  If our reasons for that choice are shaped by the New Testament, we are motivated not by the sheer horror of war, not by the desire of saving our own skins and the skins of our children (if we are trying to save our skins, pacifism is a very poor strategy), not by some general feeling of reverence for human life, not by the naive hope that all people are really nice and will be friendly if we are friendly first.  No, if our reasons for choosing nonviolence are shaped by the New Testament witness, we act in simple obedience to the God who willed that his own Son should give himself up to death on a cross.  We make this choice in the hope and anticipation that God’s love will finally prevail through the way of the cross, despite our inability to see how this is possible.  That is the life of discipleship to which the New Testament repeatedly calls us.  When the church as a community is faithful to that calling, it prefigures the peaceable kingdom of God in a world wracked by violence.” – Richard Hays^[4]The Moral Vision of the New Testament: Community, Cross, New Creation: A Contemporary Introduction to New Testament Ethics (New York, HarperOne, 1996).

“Our illusory attempts to control history, to make it come out right, can make us a violent people.  Our wars, our tremendous military outlays, are justified as acts of compassion for the unjustly wronged peoples of the world.  We feel we must act because God will not.  To read history in light of the crucified Jesus, however, is to refuse such murderous compassion, and to find the silent activity of God among the victims of the world.” – William Cavanaugh^[5]“Absolute Moral Norms and Human Suffering: An Apocalyptic Reading of Endo’s Silence,” in Logos, volume 2 (3), pages 96-116.

War is Not Just

“When evil means are employed, means which even contradict the ends sought, these ends are never attained: the means take central place, and the ends are either forgotten, or become purely rhetorical.  The evil means form men’s souls, while the good ends lose their living force.  Hence the empire of falsehoods in which man is submerged. . . Freedom is never achieved by violence, brotherhood through hatred, peace by bloody conflict.  Evil means are poisonous.  The autumn of revolution never resembles its spring.  In practice, the use of evil means against the enemy is always declared permissible, for the enemy is no longer considered human.  And the inescapable, vicious circle is formed.  Christ’s words about loving our enemies offer escape from this vicious circle of hatred.  When hatred and revenge are invoked for the sake of liberation, enslavement is the result.  The organization of a more just and happy society is not an end in itself, it is only a means toward a worthful human existence.  Humanity’s aim remains the higher values, but these predicate humanized means.  The end is meaningful only if we begin its realization here and now.” – Nicolas Berdyaev^[6]The Realm of Spirit and the Realm of Caesar, translated by Donald A. Lowrie (New York: New York Harper & Bros, 1952), pages 88-89.

“When the agreement of men is taken away, virtue has no existence at all; for what are the interests of our country, but the inconveniences of another state or nation? — that is, to extend the boundaries which are violently taken from others, to increase the power of the state, to improve the revenues — all which things are not virtues, but the overthrowing of virtues: for, in the first place, the union of human society is taken away, the abstaining from the property of another is taken away; lastly, justice itself is taken away, which is unable to bear the tearing asunder of the human race, and wherever arms have glittered, must be banished and exterminated from thence. . . For how can a man be just who injures, who hates, who despoils, who puts to death?  And they who strive to be serviceable to their country do all these things: for they are ignorant of what this being serviceable is, who think nothing useful, nothing advantageous, but that which can be held by the hand; and this alone cannot be held, because it may be snatched away.  Whoever, then, has gained for his country these goods–as they themselves call them–that is, who by the overthrow of nations has filled the treasury with money, has taken lands and enriched his countrymen–he is exalted with praises to the heaven: in him there is said to be the greatest and perfect virtue.  And this is the error–not only of the people and the ignorant, but also of philosophers, who even give precepts for injustice, lest folly and wickedness should be wanting in discipline and authority.  Therefore, when they are speaking of the duties relating to warfare, all that discourse is accommodated neither to justice, nor to true virtue, but to this life and to civil institutions; and that this is not justice the matter itself declares.” – Lactantius^[7]“The Divine Institutes,” in Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325, Volume 7 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994).

“The sword is the cross turned upside-down. There are many reasons given for turning the cross upside down.  In fact, Christian Just War Theories, as well as Christian Just Capital Punishment Theories, Christian Just Inquisition Theories, and Christian Just Abortion Theories, are bottomless wells of reasons for turning the cross upside down – for “justly” inflicting suffering rather than enduring unjust suffering as Christ endured unjust suffering.  In the process, these Christian Just Homicide Theories turn the image of God, as revealed by Jesus, upside down.  They turn the image of Jesus upside down; the self-image of the Christian upside-down; the image of the Christian community upside down; the image of humanity’s relationship with God upside-down; and humanity’s image of itself upside-down.” – Emmanuel Charles McCarthy^[8]Christian Just War Theory: The Logic of Deceit (Wilmington, DE: Center for Christian Nonviolence), 1.8-9.

The God of Peace

“True reconciliation can never be accomplished by inflicting pain and suffering on others, but only through nonviolent love.  The agape love of the nonviolent struggle for truth, justice, and peace is characterized by the willing acceptance of personal suffering rather than violent retaliation and killing.  This voluntary suffering in love is best demonstrated by Jesus Christ on the cross as he resisted the forces of death and darkness with total, bottomless love.  Christ has been winning over hearts throughout the centuries because of his selfless love for all humanity demonstrated in his acceptance of violence and his nonviolent response to it.  The deepest understanding of this truth about nonviolent liberation is reached by experiencing and practicing suffering love in action.” – John Dear^[9]Our God is Nonviolent: Witnesses in the Struggle for Peace and Justice (New York: The Pilgrim Press, 1990), page 15.

“Christian concern for peace is not an optional hobby of some softhearted people.  It is not the product of a debatable reading of the accuracy of the technical assumptions built into the Pentagon’s scenarios for preparedness.  Concern for peace, whether Jewish or Christian, is part of the purpose of God for all eternity.  God is by nature a reconciler, a maker of shalom.  For us to participate in the peacemaking purposes of that kind of God is not just morality.  It is not just politics.  It is worship, doxology, praise.” – John Howard Yoder^[10]He Came Preaching Peace, (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1985).