Rejecting alternatives, and a book to give away

The advocate of war cannot say there is no other recourse before weighing nonviolent alternatives.

That’s from chapter 7 of John Howard Yoder’s The War of the Lamb: The Ethics of Nonviolence and Peacemaking, edited by Glen Stassen, Mark Thiessen Nation, and Matt Hamsher. Not that the quotation is a summary of the book itself, or the climax; I have been meditating on the sentence for a while, following where the Lord leads my thoughts, where he’s taking me toward the application stage.

And what do I think? Well, Jesus-centered peacemakers and nonviolent activists have long been a thorn in the side of Christians that find themselves coveting the cause of “war as needed.” I have found so often, even in my relatively short life as a disciple of the nonviolent Jesus, that our message, perspective, opinion (whatever you want to call it), is not simply considered wrong or invalid. It’s not considered. The commentary and interpretation of Scripture, the perspectives on the theological and practical implications, have often been dismissed, without even a thought or a glance, the moment the Christians we talk with hear “pacifist” or “nonviolent” or even “Kingdom of God.”

Oh. And don’t dare say the name “Yoder.” Apparently that will immediately disqualify you from knowing Scripture and understanding theology and the real world. (No, really. That’s from folks that have not read Yoder.)

I have observed that for the most part those on the side of nonviolence (pacifism, just peace, etc.) tend to read not only nonviolent texts and commentaries, but also those of opposing opinions. I’ve done that for years on the urging of my college professors: take all sides, learn the arguments, understand your opponents, understand your own traditions. I have not found that to be the case when you turn the table. There seems to be relatively more ignorance about nonviolent theology and reading of Scripture on the part of those who hold to “war as needed” than vice-versa. In fact, there tends to be a lot of straw men created, a lot of jumping to conclusions, and assuming what we would and would not do as pacifists.

And that’s just sad. It’s a shame, really.

Before you jump to “Oh, he’s whining, has a martyr complex, poor guy feeling persecuted,” keep reading on. My point is not to merely rant and give the old “whoa is me” routine.

Back to what Yoder said: “The advocate of war cannot say there is no other recourse before weighing nonviolent alternatives.” But that is what happens more often than not. The advocate of war, or those who hold to “war as needed,” does not seek out the nonviolent alternatives. You might say, “We’ve exhausted all diplomatic efforts.” Sure, but that’s not what nonviolent alternatives means. And therein lies the heart of the problem: they will not dig deeper and seek out what those nonviolent alternatives might be. If any plan or solution or response excludes the idea of violence, then it’s pie-in-the-sky, pure ideology, unrealistic, and therefore invalid.

So what should we pacifists do? If we are not respected, listened to, included in the discussion? If our views are dismissed, excluded from the conversation?

Well…love, of course. How better to prove the true, nonviolent teaching and example of Jesus than to live it out? The reason we respond with love to ridicule, antagonism, patronizing arrogance, and being cast aside as irrelevant, is because that is how we would respond to any form of attack or persecution. Sure, we will call people to repent. Sin is still evil, and evil must not be intertwined with the Kingdom of God. If Christians are supporting torture, we must call them to repent of such an evil. If Christians are supporting an attack on a city that kills people (simple, isn’t it?), we must call them to repent. When those who proclaim the name of Christ are muddying the waters, and compromising the Good News of Jesus, for the sake of self or of an earthly kingdom, we must call them to repent.

But we never stop loving them. We never stop seeking reconciliation and community. We never stop searching for opportunities to dialogue, even when they only want a monologue. Do I care about being dismissed without even the facade of being reasonably considered? Sure; but just to the extent that I would love to see all fellow disciples of Jesus embrace and live out our Master’s teachings and am saddened by Christians embracing the kingdom of man, the ways of Empire, the rule of human common sense. If it becomes about me, then I’ve failed. While it is very personal, this is about Jesus…not me.

No matter what side of the discussion we’re on, we all need to respect and appreciate the perspectives, experiences, opinions, and education of others. We all need to be humble; we don’t know it all, and guess what: we are all wrong about stuff. We need to dispense with the arrogance, and display the reconciling love of our Lord.

Now, the title of this post mentions a book giveaway. I have a second, mint copy of Yoder’s The War of the Lamb, and I’d like to give it away. But, I don’t know how I’ll do that yet. Ideally, I’d want the book to get into the hands of someone who isn’t necessarily a pacifist, let alone an Anabaptist, but is wanting to learn more about the discussion of nonviolence and peacemaking. Maybe you are in that position. Maybe you know someone like that. Maybe you want to get a hold of this book to read it then pass it on. Ultimately, I want this to be a useful resource for someone. This book has helped me tremendously in many ways, but I am not a Yoder scholar. I have not read all of his articles and books as many of my nonviolent brethren have. I’m not sure this book will offer enlightenment to those Anabaptists that have been treading the waters for decades, but it will certainly flip on some lights for those like me, still relatively green.

I’m open to ideas. Any thoughts on what I might do to give this book away? I know some folks that I would love to give it to, but I can assure you they will not read it. One in particular simply because it has John Howard Yoder on the cover.