Peace and Nonviolence (Quotations from)

HOME: AUTHORS AND EXCERPTS ON THIS SITE

2007-03-31T15:45:00.001-04:00

Of all my study and readings regarding the Revolution Toward Militant Brotherliness (aka nonviolence) this collection of essays is by far the most helpful. Edward Guinan has been used to give us the Gift of a Miracle. These quotes below, and his book must be read.

We seem to have lost all recolection of what courage and citizenship outside of the military looks like. These excerpts and quotations can serve as a quick reminder:

"Peace and Nonviolence" author, If we Listen Well, Ed Guinan Introduction, Napoleon
Christian Nonresisstance, Adin Ballou
Paul IV, from Intro
Reflections on War, Simone Weil
Leo Tolstoy
An Indian Prayer: A Proposal to Man. Ron Skenand...
POPES, BISHOPS, COUNCILS
THE WORKABILITY OF NONVIOLENCE, A.J. MUSTE
I Believe, Perry Muckerheidi
PEACE AND REVOLUTION, THOMAS MERTON
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
THINGS NEW AND OLD, CLARENCE JORDAN
Is There Anything the Individual Can Still Do? Fr...
Address to the Congres de la Paix, Victor Hugo
Letter to a Minister of State, Hermann Hesse
THE MEANING OF THIS HOUR, ABRAHAM J. HESCHEL
LOVE IN ACTION, Thich Nhat Hanh
Active Nonviolence, Hildegaard Goss-Mayr
DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS 1938, WILLIAM LLOYD GARR...
Religious Satyagraha, M.K. Gandhi
The Time of My Commitment, George Fox
Our Father, Desiderius Erasmus
Nonviolence VS the Mafia, Danilo Dolci
Dorothy Day
Not the Smallest Grain of Incense, Tom Cornell
Militant Non-Violence, William Sloane Coffin
Cesar Chavez
Fetters of Injustice, Dom Helder Camara
Stations on the Road to Freedom, Dietrich Bonhoeff...
Christ's Teachings, Vinoba Bhave
An Open Letter to a Bishop, Philip Berrigan
A Meditation from Catonsville, Dan Berrigan

Introduction, Napoleon

2007-03-23T09:29:00.000-04:00

"Do you know, Fontanes, what astonishes me most in this world? The inability of force to create anything. In the long run the sword is always beaten by the spirit."

Christian Nonresisstance, Adin Ballou

2007-03-23T05:22:00.000-04:00

Bio: Adin Ballou, the founder of the Utopian Hopedale Community in 1841, was also co-founder (with William Lloyd Garrison) and president of the New England Non-Resistance Society. The selections here * are a clear and forceful statement on non-resistance in Gospel terms. As a thinker, Ballou’s writings influenced the thought of Thoreau, Tolstoy and Gandhi.

Quotations:

"Whence originated the term Christian nonresistance? Non-resistance comes from the injunction, “resist not evil,” Matt. 5:39. The words “resist not,” being changed from the form of a verb to that of a substantive, give us non-resistance."

"It will appear from the foregoing exposition that a true Christian non-resistant cannot, with deliberate intent, knowledge or conscious voluntariness, compro mise his principles by either of the following acts.
1. He cannot kill, maim or otherwise absolutely injure any human being, in personal self-defense, or for the sake of his family, or any thing he holds dear.
2. He cannot participate in any lawless conspiracy, mob, riotous assembly, or disorderly combination of individuals, to cause or countenance the commission of any such absolute personal injury.
3. Je cannot he a member of any voluntary association, how ever orderly, respectable or allowable by law and general consent, which declaratively holds as fundamental truth, or claims as an essential right, or distinctly inculcates as sound doctrine, or ap proves as commendable in practice, war, capital punishment, or any other absolute personal injury.
4. He cannot be an officer or private, chaplain or retainer, in the army, navy or militia of any nation, state, or chieftain.
5. He cannot be an officer, elector, agent, legal prosecutor, pas sive constituent, or approver of any government, as a sworn or otherwise pledged supporter thereof, whose civil constitution and fundamental laws require, authorize or tolerate war, slavery, capital punishment, or the infliction of any absolute personal injury.
6. He cannot be a member of any chartered corporation or body politic, whose articles of compact oblige or authorize its official functionaries to resort for compulsory aid in the conducting of its affairs to a government of constitutional violence.
7. Finally, he cannot do any act, either in person or by proxy; nor abet or encourage any act in others; nor demand, petition for, request, advise or approve the doing of any act, by an individ ual, association or government, which act would inflict, threaten to inflict, or necessarily cause to be inflicted any absolute personal injury, as herein before defined."

Paul IV, from Intro

2007-03-23T04:48:00.000-04:00

"The awareness of a universal brotherhood is developing in our world, at least in principle. Whoever works to educate the rising generations in the conviction that every man is our brother is building from the foundation the edifice of peace. Whoever implants in public opinion the sentiment of human brotherhood, without any limits, is preparing better days for the world. Whoever conceives of the protection of political interests as a logical and organic necessity of social life, without the incitement of hate and combat among men, is opening to human society the ever effective advancement of the common good. Whoever helps in discovering in every man— beyond his physical, ethical, ethnic and racial characteristics—the existence of a being equal to his own, is transforming the earth from an epicenter of division, antagonism, treachery and revenge into a field of vital work for civil collaboration. For where brotherhood among men is at root disregarded, peace is at root destroyed. And yet peace is the mirror of real, authentic, modern humanity, victorious over every anachronistic self-injury. Peace is the great concept extolling love among men, who discover that they are brothers and decide to live as such."

Reflections on War, Simone Weil

2007-03-23T04:41:00.000-04:00

Bio: A French writer, and part of the French Resistance to the Nazi regime, Simone Weil was 24 when she wrote this article, “Reflections on War.” She was born a Jew, but rejected Judaism and became sym pathetic to the Catholic Church. Thomas Merton has said of her, “Simone Weil is one of those brilliant and independent French thinkers who were able to articulate the deepest concerns of Europe in the first half of this century.”

Quotations:

"But the impotence one feels today—an impotence we should never consider permanent—does not excuse one from remaining true to oneself, nor does it excuse capitulation to the enemy, what ever mask he may wear. Whether the mask is labeled fascism, democracy, or dictatorship of the proletariat, our great adversary remains The Apparatus—the bureaucracy, the police, the military. Not the one facing us across the frontier or the battle lines, which is not so much our enemy as our brothers’ enemy, but the one that calls itself our protector and makes us its slaves. No matter what the circumstances, the worst betrayal will always be to subordinate ourselves to this Apparatus, and to trample underfoot, in its service, all human values in ourselves and in others."

Leo Tolstoy

2007-03-23T04:20:00.000-04:00

Bio: A man caught in the turmoils and social upheavals of his time, Leo Tolstoy was one of the giants of his age. His philosophy was based on a radical understanding of the ethical demands of Christianity. He was an artist, a pioneer in new educational forms, and a theoretician of non-violence. He is a man whose influence is still being felt. In the first selection,* Tolstoy discusses the states of the Christian world. The second selection is the text of a letter addressed to The Daily Chronicle. The final selection *** is a letter Tolstoy wrote to Ernst Schramm, a young draftee of the Hessian army, in 1899. This was Tolstoy’s second letter to Schramm; however, before it reached him, Schramm had left his native land to avoid conscription.

States of the Christain World

"The states of the Christian world have not only reached, but in our day have passed, the limits toward which the states of ancient times were approaching before their dismemberment. We can see this from the fact that each step we make today toward material progress not only does not advance us toward the general well-being, but shows us, on the contrary, that all these technical improvements only increase our miseries. One can imagine other machines, submarine subterranean and aerial, for transporting men with the rapidity of lighting; one could multiply to infinity the means of propagating human speech and thought, but it would remain no less the case that these travelers, so comfortably and rapidly transported, are neither willing nor able to commit anything but evil, and the thoughts and words they pour forth would only incite men to further harm. As to the beautifully perfected armaments of destruction, which, while diminishing the risk of those who employ them, make carnage easier, they only give further proof of the impossibility of persevering in the direction we are going.

Thus, the horror of the situation of the Christian world has a double aspect: on the one hand the absence of a moral principle of union, and on the other a gradual lowering of man to a degree below that of the animals, in spite of his intellectual progress and the complexity of the lies that hide from us our misery and our cruelty.

The lies cover the cruelty, the cruelty causes the spreading of the lies, and both increase like insidious snowballs. But everything must come to an end. And I believe that a crisis in this horrible situation is approaching. The evils, resulting from the lack of a religious ideal corresponding to our epoch, are the inevitable conditions of progress; they should as inevitably disappear after the adoption of such an ideal."

Reply to Critics

"But the fact is that the Christian doctrine, in its true sense, never proposed to abolish anything, nor to change any human organization. The very thing which distinguishes Christian religion from all other religions and social doctrines is that it gives men the possibilities of a real and good life, not by means of general laws regulating the lives of all men, but by enlightening each individual man with regard to the sense of his own life, by showing him wherein consists the evil and the real good of his life. And the sense of life thus imparted to man by the Christian doctrine is so simple, so convincing, and leaves so little room for doubt, that if once man understands it, and, therefore, conceives wherein is the real good and the real evil of his life, he can never again consciously do what he considers to be the evil of his life, nor abstain from doing what he considers to be the real good of it, as surely as a plant cannot help turning toward light, and water cannot help running downward.

The sense of life, as shown by the Christian religion, consists in living so as to do the will of Him who sent us into life, from whom we are come, and to whom we shall return. The evil of our life consists in acting against this will, and the good in fulfilling it. And the rule given to us for the fulfillment of this will is so very plain and simple that it is impossible not to understand, or to misunderstand it.

If you cannot do unto others what you would that they should do to you, at least do not unto them what you would not that they should do unto you.

If you would not be made to work ten hours at a stretch in factories or in mines, if you would not have your children hungry, cold, and ignorant, if you would not be robbed of the land that feeds you, if you would not be shut up in prisons and sent to the gallows or hanged for committing an unlawful deed through passion or ignorance, if you would not suffer wounds nor be killed in war—do not do this to others. All this is so simple and straight forward, and admits of so little doubt, that it is impossible for the simplest child not to understand, nor for the cleverest man to refute it. It is impossible to refute this law, especially because this law is given to us, not only by all the wisest men of the world, not only by the Man who is considered to be God by the majority of Christians, but because it is written in our minds and hearts.

Let us imagine a servant in his lord’s power, appointed by his master to a task he loves and understands. If this man were to be addressed by men whom he knows to be dependent on his master in the same way as he is, to whom smaller tasks are set at which they will not work, and who would entreat him for his own good and for the good of other men to do what is directly opposed to his lord’s plain commandments, what answer can any reasonable servant give to such entreaties? But this simile is far from fully expressing what a Christian must feel when he is called upon to take an active part in oppressing, robbing people of their land, in executing them, in waging war, and so on, all things which governments call upon us to do; for, however binding the comands of that master may have been to his servant, they can never be compared to that unquestionable knowledge which every man, as long as he is not corrupted by false doctrines, does possess, that he cannot and must not do unto others what he does not wish to be done unto him, and therefore cannot and must not take part in all things opposed to the rule of his Master, which are imosed upon him by governments.

Therefore the question for a Christian does not lie in this: whether or not a man has the right to destroy the existing order of things, and to establish another in its stead, or to decide which kind of government will be the best, as the question is sometimes purposely and very often unintentionally put by the enemies of Christianity (the Christian does not think about the general order of things, but leaves the guidance of them to God, for he firmly believes God has implanted His law in our minds and hearts, that there may be order, not disorder, and that nothing but good can arise from our following the unquestionable law of God, which has been so plainly manifested to us); but the question, the decision of which is not optional, but unavoidable, and which daily presents itself for a Christian to decide, is: How am I to act in the dilemma which is constantly before me? Shall I form part of a government which recognizes the right to own landed property by men who never work on it, which levies taxes on the poor in order to give them to the rich, which condemns erring men to gallows and death, which sends out soldiers to commit murder, which depraves whole races of men by means of opium and brandy, etc., or shall I refuse to take a share in a government, the doings of which are contrary to my conscience? But what will come of it, what sort of State will there be, if I act in this way, is a thing I do not know and which I shall not say I do not wish to know, but which I cannot know.

The main strength of Christ’s teaching consists especially in this: that he brought the question of conduct from a world of conjecture and eternal doubt, down to a firm and indisputable ground. Some people say, “But we also do not deny the evils of the existing order and the necessity of changing it, but we wish to change it, not suddenly, by means of refusing to take any part in the government, but, on the contrary, by participating in the government, by gaining more and more freedom, political rights, and obtaining the election of the true friends of the people and the enemies of all violence.”

This would be very well, if taking part in one’s government and trying to improve it could coincide with the aim of human life. But, unfortunately, it not only does not coincide, but is quite op posed to it." "

"“Wilt thou, a being of reason and goodness, who comes today and may vanish tomorrow, wilt thou, if thou believest in the existence of God, act against His law and His will, knowing that any moment thou canst return to Him; or, if thou dost not believe in Him, wilt thou, knowing that if thou errest thou shalt never be able to redeem thy error, wilt thou, nevertheless, act in opposition to the principles of reason and love, by which alone thou canst be guided in life? Wilt thou, at the request of thy government, take oaths, defend, by compulsion, the owner of land or capital, wilt thou pay taxes for keeping policemen, soldiers, warships, wilt thou take part in parliaments, law courts, condemnations and wars?”

And to all this—I will not say for a Christian, but for a reason able being—there can be but one answer: “No, I cannot, and will not.” But they say, “This will destroy the State and the existing order.” If the fulfillment of the will of God is destroying the existing order, is it not a proof that this existing order is contrary to the will of God, and ought to be destroyed?"

Advice to a Draftee

"In my last letter I answered your question as well as I could. It is not only Christians but all just people who must refuse to become soldiers—that is, to be ready on another’s command (for this is what a soldier’s duty actually consists of) to kill all those one is ordered to kill. The question as you state it—which is more useful, to become a good teacher or to suffer for rejecting conscription?—is falsely stated. The question is falsely stated because it is wrong for us to determine our actions according to their results, to view actions merely as useful or destructive. In the choice of our actions we can be led by their advantages or disadvantages only when the actions themselves are not opposed to the demands of morality."

"The question should not be stated: which is more useful, to be a good teacher or go to jail for refusing conscription? but rather: what should a man do who has been called upon for military service—that is, called upon to kill or to prepare himself to kill?

And to this question, for a person who understands the true meaning of military service and who wants to be moral, there is only one clear and incontrovertible answer: such a person must refuse to take part in military service no matter what consequences this refusal may have. It may seem to us that this refusal could be futile or even harmful, and that it would be a far more useful thing, after serving one’s time, to become a good village teacher. But in the same way, Christ could have judged it more useful for himself to be a good carpenter and submit to all the principles of the Pharisees than to die in obscurity as he did, repudiated and forgotten by everyone.

Moral acts are distinguished from all other acts by the fact that they operate independently of any predictable advantage to our selves or to others. No matter how dangerous the situation may be of a man who finds himself in the power of robbers who demand that he take part in plundering, murder, and rape, a moral person cannot take part. Is not military service the same thing? Is one not required to agree to the deaths of all those one is commanded to kill?"

"If I, finding myself in a crowd of running people, run with the crowd without knowing where, it is obvious that I have given my self up to mass hysteria; but if by chance I should push my way to the front, or be gifted with sharper sight than the others, or receive information that this crowd was racing to attack human beings and toward its own corruption, would I really not stop and tell the people what might rescue them? Would I go on running and do these things which I knew to be bad or corrupt? This is the situation of every individual called up for military service, if he knows what military service means."

"In every person’s life there are moments in which he can know himself, tell himself who he is, whether he is a man who values his human dignity above his life or a weak creature who does not know his dignity and is concerned merely with being useful (chiefly to himself). This is the situation of a man who goes out to defend his honor in a duel or a soldier who goes into battle (although here the concepts of life are wrong). It is the situation of a doctor or a priest called to someone sick with plague, of a man in a burning house or a sinking ship who must decide whether to let the weaker go first or shove them aside and save himself. It is the situation of a man in poverty who accepts or rejects a bribe. And in our times, it is the situation of a man called to military service. For a man who knows its significance, the call to the army is perhaps the only opportunity for him to behave as a morally free creature and fulfill the highest requirement of his life—or else merely to keep his advantage in sight like an animal and thus re main slavishly submissive and servile until humanity becomes degraded and stupid."

An Indian Prayer: A Proposal to Man. Ron Skenandore

2007-03-23T04:14:00.000-04:00

Bio: One of the very impressive spokesmen for the American Indian Movement, Rod Skenandore was one of the prime resource people at the Young World Development’s National Conversation during the summer of 1971. He delivered “An Indian Prayer” during the conference, one of the most moving moments for the gathering.

Quotations:

"I taught you when you first came to this land to plant certain things in the soil by which to survive. For you did not know the nature of this soil. And even though my methods were not all that productive quantity-wise, they worked. I taught you to take the skins of certain animals and to tan them. When you had learned this, I taught you to sew the hides together, and the protection these methods provided was far better than you employed. In your newness to this country, I took the time to teach you and you repaid me with death. But now, my brothers, don’t you think it is only fair and almost past time when you show me your appreciation by allowing me from here on out to live in the way I see fit? Don’t you think I should have a choice in the way I want to protect my own country? For once, allow me to decide if I want to go off and to fight in the wars you start and to perish as you obviously relish at the thought of for egotistic reasons. Allow me to live under my own laws as before, and I will not interfere with yours. Allow me to have control over my homelands that are called reservations, and if I want to be neutral where other countries are concerned, let me. Let me walk this land where I was born and where the spirits of my ancestors still sing in my songs. And, allow me to worship as I myself see fit. For have you not said that God is a just God? And if he is, he will not mind. For even though my ways of worship are different than those of yours, they still praise and thank the same thought. And allow me to have a seat in your United Nations. And if I want, let me beat on the table with my shoe while I voice my objections as you have allowed others to do. And if I so desire, let me speak as alternatively as you.

And when you have allowed me all these rights as are the rights of man that you wrote of, then at a point in time, let us meet on a neutral ground. And after we have prayed, thanking the spirits, let us smoke the pipe of man together. And, while we smoke, let us both see how the other is made. And then before the pipe goes out and before our spirits depart, let us take the other by the hand and speak the words, “I love you, my brother, and forever you will remain my brother.” And then forever like the blowing wind, and with feelings deeper than the reaches of space and warmer than the radiance of the sun, let us live as brothers in peace."

POPES, BISHOPS, COUNCILS

2007-03-23T04:02:00.000-04:00

Bio: The late Pope John XXIII, one of the greatest spiritual and social influences in the century, left a great legacy in his encyclical Pacem in Terris, an excerpt of which is printed below, and in the spirit of Vatican Council II which he convened and which was continued by his successor Pope Paul VI, a portion of whose encyclical The Development of Peoples is also given. Included here too are excerpts from Vatican Council II's Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, the National Council of Catholic Bishops’ Justice in the World, and a statement of American bishops made in the fall of 1971.

Quotations:

THE DEVELOPMENT OF PEOPLES - "God intended the earth and all that it contains for the use of every human being and people. Thus, as all men follow justice and unite in charity, created goods should abound for them on a reasonable basis.” All other rights whatsoever, including those of property and of free commerce, are to be subordinated to this principle."

"Property

To quote Saint Ambrose: “You are not making a gift of your possessions to the poor person. You are handing over to him what is his. For what has been given in common for the use of all, you have arrogated to yourself. The world has given to all, and not only to the rich.” That is, private property does not constitute for anyone an absolute and unconditioned right. No one is justified in keeping for his exclusive use what he does not need, when others lack necessities. In a word, “according to the traditional doctrine as found in the Fathers of the Church and the great theologians, the right to property must never be exercised to the detriment of the common good.” If there should arise a conflict “between acquired private rights and primary community exigencies,” it is the responsibility of public authorities “to look for a solution, with the active participation of individuals and social groups.” "

JUSTICE IN THE WORLD

"Let recognition be given to the fact that international order is rooted in the inalienable rights and dignity of the human being. Let the United Nations’ Declaration of Human Rights be ratified by all governments who have not yet adhered to it, and let it be fully observed by all."

"War / Nonviolence

Ancient divisions between nations and empires, between races and classes, today possess new technological instruments of destruction. The arms race is a threat to man’s highest good, which is life; it makes poor peoples and individuals yet more miserable, while making richer those already powerful; it creates a continuous danger of conflagration, and in the case of nuclear arms it threatens to destroy all life from the face of the earth."

"Wealth

Our faith demands of us a certain sparingness in use, and the Church is obliged to live and administer its own goods in such a way that the Gospel is proclaimed to the poor. If instead the Church appears to be among the rich and the powerful of this world its credibility is diminished.

We have nevertheless been able to perceive the serious injustices which are building around the world of men a network of domination, oppression and abuses which stifle freedom and which keep the greater part of humanity from sharing in the building up and enjoyment of a more just and more fraternal world.

Unless combatted and overcome by social and political action, the influence of the new industrial and technological order favors the concentration of wealth, power and decision-making in the hands of a small public or private controlling group."

THE WORKABILITY OF NONVIOLENCE, A.J. MUSTE

2007-03-23T03:36:00.000-04:00

Bio: During his lifetime, A. J. Muste was regarded as one of the most prominent spokesmen for the pacifist movement in America. He wavered in the mid-1930’s, believing violence to be an effective means for change, but after 1936 he was reconverted to the validity of a religious-based pacifism, as the fol lowing selection ‘K indicates.

Quotations:

"There are two ultimate questions we must now consider. If we may use a military figure to state a pacifist case, we can say that one is the question of what we fight for; the other of what we fight with and rely on for a sense of security.

Paradoxically, life is worth living for those who have something for which they will gladly give up life. Individuals and nations need something beyond themselves to which they give unconditional homage and devotion. A nation cannot exist if it has no purpose save to exist, to survive at any cost and on any terms. It needs a spiritual goal. In the words of the Psalmist, “Except the Lord build the city, they labor in vain that build it.” "

"In answer to the question, “What constitutes the bulwark of our own liberty and independence?" Lincoln replied: “It is not our frowning battlements, our bristling sea coasts, our army and our navy. These are not our reliance against tyranny. All of these may be turned against us without making us weaker for the struggle. . . . Our defense is in the spirit which prized liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands, everywhere.”

A people thus devoted to a spiritual goal and thus skilled in wielding spiritual weapons would have immense driving and staying power, It would have a faith that other peoples, especially the long down-trodden masses, could embrace in place of the Communist faith that has so vast an attraction for them now. .

The Western world in its concept of democracy, the United States in “the American dream,” and Christians in their gospel and ethic of love, of evil, overcome not by evil but by good, have knowledge of such a spiritual goal."

"With the chanting of the magic word “utopianism,” these people dismiss the challenge and the hope of building brotherhood on earth as in heaven. Alas, not a few peace-workers are among them, placing their reliance on some device by which an unrepent ant and essentially unbelieving nation will on the basis of self-interest work out an agreement with an unrepentant and avowedly unbelieving Communist regime that will bring peace!'

On the other hand, if in any typical Protestant church of a Sun day morning I were to say pretty much what I have here been writing about centering our national policy around the needy children of the world, Christian hearts would be touched and Christian heads would be nodded gravely in assent. And then, as the Roper polls show, these good Christian folk would agree nearly to the man that it is also right and wise for the United States to keep adding to the H-bomb stockpile as the best way to keep the godless, Christ-denying Communists from coming over here and closing Christ’s churches!"

"The problem of morale and faith facing the West is here vividly laid bare. It is that the Christian nations, Christian churches, Christian people are in thorough agreement with that Communist. Again the “enemy” is ourselves. We and that Communist are agreed that the Christian faith and way are superior; agreed that someday it has to prevail; and agreed that this will come to pass after we—Communists and Christians—have made it possible for our ways of life to survive and prevail by our respective impure and violent means. The Communists believe it will come to pass “after the revolution” when they are in control. American Christians believe it will come after they by the threat or use of their atomic arsenal have got things under control. But they all unite in the grand chorus: “But it isn’t practical now!”

At an earlier stage we found that it is not possible to be ab sorbed at one and the same time in the power struggle and in the task of spreading general well-being across the world and building a stable world economy. We are faced with a choice of goals.

A choice of means must likewise be made, however we may shrink from it. Our firm conviction as pacifists is that it is not possible to achieve democracy by undemocratic means, to over come Communism by resorting increasingly to Communist methods, to save the values of. Christian civilization by throwing them overboard as modern war requires us to do. On the positive side it is our conviction that love translated into concrete action for human brotherhood is the way to overcome evil and that the spiritual power which flows through men when they give themselves to God in faith and obedience is real and the most potent force in the universe.

In this context we always come up against the question, “Will it work?” Will it work with the Russians, the Communists, the totalitarians? In the abstract and in general people are usually willing to grant the pacifist case, but the concrete enemy of the moment is always a special case. Nor would pacifists deny that totalitarianism in its modern forms and equipped with modern weapons of thought control, regimentation and terrorism presents a tremendous challenge to pacifists. It does also to the advocates of any other method for meeting aggression and tyranny, a point which non-pacifists sometimes overlook. Their record, as we pointed out at length in the beginning of this essay, is not one of success!

But what is the pacifist’s answer to the question of workability?"

"In Christian terms we are proposing that men apply Christ’s method of uncalculating love, of feeding the enemy and so on, rather than depending upon the sword for defense or liberation.

Stating the matter in other terms, we are here thinking of the morally responsible human being. All who believe in some kind of moral order, whether or not they are Christians or consider themselves religious at all, face a crucial problem in connection with war. The question is not whether one is going to die in war; at the appointed time all men, and nations also, die. This is in the order of nature. The question for the morally responsible being is what happens to himself if he becomes a murderer, drops atomic bombs on little enemy children instead of trying to bring them food and healing. The question is what moral price he is prepared to pay for his country’s victory in war.

When on this level the Christian is asked whether the way of uncalculating love—of not “offending one of these little ones” be hind the Iron Curtain—”works” in some immediate political sense, his first answer is bound to be that he doesn’t think this is any of his business. God whom he knows in Christ commands love. He does not promise success to today’s Christian any more than he did to Jesus. Indeed, there is sure to be a cross in the picture some where. One of the signs that we are off the track is that everything goes smoothly and all men speak well of us. When the Christian asks God for victory, success, a blank check, he has ceased to believe in God.

The morally responsible person will give essentially the same answer. He has to be true, in the final pinch, to the highest that he knows. He has to be able to live with himself. If his moral standard amounts to obeying whatever orders some government gives him (remember the Nuremberg doctrine of the guilt of individual Nazis) or if his standard is what he can get away with, then he is no longer a moral being. This is why, in fact, any human being not bereft of sanity altogether “draws a line somewhere,” at some point says, “I can do no other.”

The modern pacifist draws the line at participation in atomic and bacteriological war. When he is asked whether this pacifism is “politically effective,” his reply is: “If human beings do not draw this line, then where will they draw the line? What are they waiting for?” In the great drama, Jakobowski and the Colonel, Jakobowski, the refugee, says to the Nazi colonel who has just been engaged in torturing certain victims: “There is one advantage that the hunted has over the hunter—namely, that he is not the hunter.” The advantage is an ultimate one: not to join the hunters. If a man loses it, there is nothing to compensate for the loss.

Totalitarian regimes do indeed present a grave problem, and our argument in no sense proceeds on the basis of minimizing the evil of such regimes. But the familiar argument that Gandhi could get by with non-violence in dealing with the British but that non-violence is no good in dealing with this or that other regime in practice means that any methods have to be used with the latter. This clearly means surrender of the moral life. It is capitulation to the amoral or antimoral philosophy of Bolshevism: any means is justified because my end is good. Indeed, it is to fall lower than this in the moral scale because it amounts to saying: “The mere survival of my country at any cost and by any means in a naked struggle for power is justified.” It is to enthrone the doctrine of military necessity as the moral imperative and to deny, utterly and finally, that “he who seeketh his life shall lose it.” "

"What faith in material things and military means is here revealed!

If men are not willing to practice the way of non-violence with the same kind of commitment and recklessness of cost or consequences as they practice the way of war and as Communists work for Communism, clearly non-violence will not work."

I Believe, Perry Muckerheidi

2007-03-23T03:09:00.000-04:00

Bio: Perry. Muckerheidi has spent the last few years in Milwaukee coordinating youth’s commitment to hunger and directing the Walk from Hunger Campaigns. He wrote and produced Miles to Go, an enthusiastic and spirited documentary of the walks. In mid-summer 1971 he began filing his C.O. Statement and shared his thoughts and reflections with the editor of this volume. The Prologue is included below.

Quotations:

I believe in God.
I believe in Jesus Christ.
I believe in Man.

I believe in God as the infinite power which is the reason for my being.
I believe in Jesus Christ as major revelation of God.
I believe in man as the house of God, created in his image.

I believe that my finite person is incapable of ever comprehending the infinite, yet God reveals himself to me daily through myself and relations with others, through the lives of men and women throughout history, and ultimately through the life of Christ.
I believe that through Jesus Christ, the man from Nazareth, God reveals to me the life I should live.
I believe God lives within me and all of mankind.

I believe the basis of life is love: love of oneself, love of one’s neighbor, and as Christ has said, love of one’s enemies.

I believe we are meant to live in harmony.
I believe that when we seek this harmony with the motivations of love, we glorify God as he has commanded.

I believe in the basic law of God: Thou shall not kill.
I believe in the basic law of God: Thou shall have no other gods be fore me.
I believe that since God lives within each of us and all of us, the service of man is the service of God; therefore the destruction of man is the profaning of God.
I believe in non-violence as witnessed by the life of Christ.
I believe the laws of man must become secondary when they conflict with the natural laws of God.

I believe life must be a witness.
I believe this witness must be total, a commitment of all one’s talents to the glory of God.
I believe this witness must work to overcome national, racial, economic, political and cultural divisions to unite mankind in peace.

I believe the way of God is the way witnessed by Christ which is the way of peace.
I believe peace is found through its pursuit.
I believe God is revealed through the pursuit of peace.

I believe to search for the revelations of God is to work to know God.
I believe to seek God is to know God.
I believe God reveals himself through the revelations of the soul.
I believe the soul is revealed through the process of the search for it.
I believe the search takes many individual and collective forms.
I believe it is found in the development of creativity which is within all of us, which we must work to free for the collective use in the service of man, which is again the revelation of God.
I believe it is most found in the service of my fellow man as witnessed by the life of Christ, the man closest to God.

I believe that just as Christ's life is a witness to the laws of God, my life
must be a witness to my search of him through my service to man.

I believe therefore that I could not kill another man nor could I in good conscience serve or involve myself in any system, nor support in any way, the creation or continuation of any process which seeks to or results in the killing of an other man.

PEACE AND REVOLUTION, THOMAS MERTON

2007-03-23T03:02:00.000-04:00

Bio: A Trappist monk, Thomas Merton was one of the strongest voices in the 1960’s writing on a theology of non-violence and speaking against the evils of our society. Merton strongly influenced many of the contemporary Catholics active in peace and social justice today. He himself was influenced by Aldous Huxley, Erasmus and Gandhi. The following excerpt * is from an article that Merton wrote for the 1968 FAX Conference, shortly before his death later that year.

Quotations:

"Non-violence is meant to communicate love not in word but in act. Above all, non-violence is meant to convey and to defend truth which has been obscured and defiled by political double-talk."

"Has non-violence been found wanting? Yes and no. It has been found wanting wherever it has been the non-violence of the weak. It has not been found so when it has been the non-violence of the strong. What is the difference? It is a difference of language. The language of spurious non-violence is merely another, more equivocal form of the language of power. It is a different method of expressing one’s will to power. It is used and conceived pragmatically, in reference to the seizure of power. But that is not what nonviolence is about. Non-violence is not for power but for truth. It is not pragmatic but prophetic. It is not aimed at immediate political results, but at the manifestation of fundamental and crucially important truth. Non-violence is not primarily the language of efficacy, but the language of kairos. It does not say “We shall overcome” so much as “This is the day of the Lord, and whatever may happen to us, He shall overcome.” "

"It may do more than anything else to promote an irresponsible and meaningless use of force in a pseudo-revolution that will only consolidate the power of the police state. Never was it more necessary to understand the importance of genuine non-violence as a power for real change because it is aimed not so much at revolution as at conversion. Unfortunately, mere words about peace, love and civilization have completely lost all power to change anything."

DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

2007-03-23T02:43:00.000-04:00

Bio: Raised in the Southern Baptist tradition and educated in liberal theology at Boston University, Martin Luther King, Jr. was a man who met the moment of crisis and provided for Americans—both black and white—a leader and a focus of the civil rights movement in the 1960’s. The actions that he led were deeply committed to non-violence, a non-violence that was greatly influenced by Gandhi. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964

Quotations:

"I have learned now that the Master’s burden is light precisely when we take his yoke upon us.

My personal trials have also taught me the value of unmerited suffering. As my sufferings mounted I soon realized that there were two ways that I could respond to my situation: either to react with bitterness or seek to transform the suffering into a creative force. I decided to follow the latter course. Recognizing the necessity for suffering I have tried to make of it a virtue. If only to save myself from bitterness, I have attempted to see my personal or deals as an opportunity to transform myself and heal the people involved in the tragic situation which now obtains. I have lived these last few years with the conviction that unearned suffering is redemptive.

There are some who still find the cross a stumbling block, and others consider it foolishness, but I am more convinced than ever before that it is the power of God unto social and individual salvation. So like the Apostle Paul I can now humbly yet proudly say, “I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” The suffering and agonizing moments through which I have passed over the last few years have also drawn me closer to God. More than ever before I am convinced of the reality of a personal God."

"Today’s problems are so acute because the tragic evasions and defaults of several centuries have accumulated to disaster proportions. The luxury of a leisurely approach to urgent solutions—the ease of gradualism—was forfeited by ignoring the issues for too long. The nation waited until the black man was explosive with fury before stirring itself even to partial concern. Confronted now with the interrelated problems of war, inflation, urban decay, white backlash and a climate of violence, it is now forced to address itself to race relations and poverty, and it is tragically unprepared. What might once have been a series of separate problems now merge into a social crisis of al most stupefying complexity.

I am not sad that black Americans are rebelling; this was not only inevitable but eminently desirable."

"“If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?”
That’s the question before you tonight. Not, “If I stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to all of the hours that I usually spend in my office every day and every week as a pastor?” The question is not, “If I stop to help this man in need, what will happen to me?”

“If I do not stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to them?” That’s the question.

Let us rise up tonight with a greater readiness. Let us stand with a greater determination. And let us move on in these powerful days, these days of challenge, to make America what it ought to be. We have an opportunity to make America a better nation. And I want to thank God, once more, for allowing me to be here with
you.

It really doesn’t matter what happens now. I left Atlanta this morning, and as we got started on the plane, there were six of us; the pilot said over the public address system, “We are sorry for the delay, but we have Dr. Martin Luther King on the plane. And to be sure that all the bags were checked, and to be sure that noth ing would be wrong with the plane, we had to check out every thing carefully. And we’ve had the place protected and guarded all night.”

And then I got into Memphis. And some began to say the threats, or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers?
Well, I don’t know what will happen now. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn’t matter with me now. Because I’ve been to the mountaintop. And I don’t mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place.

But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land. And I’m happy tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord."

"I’d like somebody to mention that day, that “Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to give his life serving others.” I’d like for somebody to say that day, that “Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to love sonic-body.” I want you to be able to say that day, that I tried to be right on the war question. I want you to be able to say that day, that I did try to feed the hungry. And I want you to be able to say that day, that I did try in my life to clothe those who were naked. I want you to say that day, that I did try, in my life, to visit those who were in prison. I want you to say that I tried to love and serve humanity.

Yes, if you want to say that I was a Drum Major, say that I was a Drum Major for justice, say that I was a Drum Major for peace, that I was a Drum Major for righteousness."

"Cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?” Expediency asks the question, “Is it politic?” Vanity asks the question, “Is it popular?” But conscience asks the question, “Is it right?” And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him that it is right.

I can’t segregate my moral concern. We are engaged in a war where we are the aggressors. And I think it’s necessary to say to the policy-makers of our country that we are wrong. We should admit to the world that we made a tragic mistake in Vietnam."

THINGS NEW AND OLD, CLARENCE JORDAN

2007-03-23T02:27:00.000-04:00

Bio: Clarence Jordan, a farmer and biblical scholar, was a prolific writer and experimenter in community. His understanding of the content of Christianity was demonstrated in his Koinonia Farm in Americus, Georgia, an attempt to live in inter-racial harmony and in accordance with the words of Jesus. Taken from a book which offers a contemporary under standing of the teachings of Jesus, this selection * deals with two scriptural passages: “Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, Resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smitheth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5.38-39), and “Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy: but I say unto you, Love your enemies and pray for them that persecute you” (Matthew 5 :43-44).

Quotations:

"We have seen that Jesus thought of the Mosaic laws as disciplines or steps toward the creation of a new society made up of new people. His proclamation of the kingdom or heaven did not destroy the Law but fulfilled it, just as the fruit of a tree does not destroy the blossom but fulfills it, that is, brings it to its highest culmination. Jesus climaxed this thought by pointing out the stages through which the law of retaliation had passed, and how it finally came to rest in the universal love of the Father’s own heart.

There were four of these steps, each clearly defined and each progressing toward God’s final purpose. First, there was the way of unlimited retaliation; second, that of limited retaliation; third, that of limited love; and fourth, that of unlimited love. Let us seek to discover the meaning of each of these steps on the road from retalia tion to reconciliation."

"The daddy of this idea is the theory that “might makes right.” If one has the power to inflict more in jury than he receives, he has the right to do so. The main thing is to make sure ahead of time that you have more strength than your enemy. Of course, all the while he’ll be making an effort to have more power than you, but it will be a lively contest, even though there might not be any survivors.

It became evident that the end result of this method would be mutual self-destruction. Therefore, a better way was sought, and the law of limited retaliation arose. This principle declared that if one harmed another, “then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” (See Exodus 21:23-25; also Leviticus 24:20; Deuteronomy 19:21.) According to this law, if one knocks out one of your eyes, you must not knock out both of his, just one. Or if it’s a tooth, you must not retaliate by knocking out all of his teeth, just one. In other words, limit your retaliation to the exact amount of the injury. Get even, but no more. Do unto others as they do unto you. This is the attitude that characterizes some modern business organizations. The books must exactly bal ance, penny for penny, dollar for dollar. It’s also what many people have in mind when they speak of “justice.” It is the most frequent basis of capital punishment."

"Now limited retaliation is a sight better than unlimited retalia tion, especially if you’re on the receiving end, but Jesus felt that kingdom citizens should go further yet. He said, “You’ve also heard the saying, ‘Take an eye for an eye; take a tooth for a tooth.’ But I’m telling you, never respond with evil. Instead, if somebody slaps you on your right cheek, offer him the other one too. And if anybody wants to drag you into court and take away your shirt, let him have your undershirt. If somebody makes you go a mile for him, go two miles. Give to him who asks of you, and don’t turn your back on anyone who wants a loan” (Matthew 5:38-42, Cotton Patch Version). All this adds up to one thing: Let yourself be imposed upon.

The third stage is that of limited love. This method is prescribed in the Old Testament and is referred to by Jesus when he said, “All of you have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Leviticus 19:18). Some devout Jews might have agreed with Jesus that if your neighbor, i.e., another Jew, knocked out your eye or tooth he might possibly be forgiven, but if he were an enemy, i.e., a Gentile, then he should be given the works. The idea was that there had to be some limit to this love and good-will business, and the proper place to draw the line was with your own race. In this way a man could have two standards of righteousness: one in dealing with his kinsmen and another in deal ing with strangers. This is what happens invariably in a bi-racial society when the minority group is fairly large. It is the bulwark of prejudice and is echoed in such cries as “white supremacy” and “Herrenvolk.” It is also manifested in nationalism, which is merely another form of prejudice, and is back of such slogans as “America for the Americans,” not meaning, naturally, the original Americans, the Indians.

To be sure, love, even though limited to one’s own circle, is far superior to retaliation, whether limited or unlimited. But Jesus didn’t feel that even this brought the law to its final goal, or ful fillment. It was making progress, but would not be complete until it arrived at unlimited love. “But I’m telling you, love the outsiders and pray for those who try to do you in, so that you might be sons of your spiritual Father. For he lets his sun rise on both sinners and saints, and he sends rain on both good people and bad. Listen here, if you love only those who love you, what is your advantage?

Don't even scalawags do that much? And if you speak to no one hut your friends, how are you any different? Do not the non-Christians do as much? Now you, you all must be mature, as your spiritual Father is mature” (Matthew 5:44-48, Cotton Pate!:
Version).

Here Jesus is simply saying that, for kingdom citizens, love must be the basis of all relationships and that it must be applied uni versally, both to one’s race and nation and to those of other races and nations. There must be no double-dealing, no two-facedness, no partiality. Hate has the same effect upon the personality whether its object is friend or foe. Spiritual traffic cannot be halted at the artificial borders of caste or nation.

Some people rise up to say that this just isn’t practical. It might be all right to turn the other cheek to a little baby enemy that can’t hit very hard anyway, but it just won’t work with a big, bad, grown-up enemy who might knock the daylights out of you. Force is the only language some people can understand (and the only language some people can speak!), so you might as well be realistic about the matter. Suppose you try to be nice to everybody and give to those who ask of you and lend to those who borrow and let the guy who takes the shirt off your back have your undershirt, too, and then they take advantage of you. With human nature being what it is, can you go in for this until everybody is willing to live that way?

Then there are people who say that this attitude is very practical and will work if given a chance. They believe that even in the most cruel person there’s a tender spot which will respond to a con tinuous bombardment of love and good will.
Citing many examples from history, they can present a strong case for the effectiveness of non-retaliation and active love. Many of them are willing to back up their belief in this idea with their lives, which within itself is a strong argument.

The truth might be that in its initial stages unlimited love is very impractical. Folks who are determined enough to hold on to it usually wind up on a cross, like Jesus. Their goods get plundered and they get slandered. Persecution is their lot. Surely nobody would be inclined to call this practical. Yet in its final stages, un limited love seems to be the only thing that can possibly make any sense. Crucifixions have a way of being followed by resurrections. The end of love seems to be its beginning. Only lie who is foolish enough to lose his life finds it. It’s the grain of wheat which falls into the ground and dies that lives.

But Jesus didn’t tell his followers to love their enemies because love would or would not work. The idea probably never occurred to him to raise the question of whether or not it was practical. He told them that they should do it “that they might be Sons of their spiritual Father.” It was quite evident from the sunshine and rain that the Father didn’t limit his love to those who loved him and obeyed him, and it was to be expected that the Son should partake of the Father’s nature. This course of conduct would flow as nat urally from them as it would from him. Being what he is, God can’t help loving all men, regardless of what they are. Even so with God’s sons. Their nature is not determined by the reaction of their enemies, but by their relationship to the Father. So in a way, Chris tians are at the complete mercy of their enemies, since by virtue of their complete surrender to the divine will they no longer have the freedom to cease being what they are. Bound by this higher loyalty, the argument of practicality is irrelevant to them. They do not for the sake of convenience set aside their nature, any more than a minnow transforms itself into a bird when in danger of being swallowed by a bass.

Of course, one does not have to be a son of God. It is purely a voluntary matter, though the choice is the difference between life and death. Yet if one does choose to become a son, then one of the conditions is that you “love the outsiders and pray for those who try to do you in.” Hate is a denial of sonship, because the Father, not having it in his own nature, never transmits it to his offspring. Or if one confines his love to his own circle, he identifies himself not with God, who loves universally, but with the racketeers and pagans, who limit their love to those who love them."

"This is perfect," but that this was the completion of that phase of his ministry. It had come to its desired end. Paul also uses the word in I Corinthians 13:9-10. “For we know by parts and we prophesy by parts, but when that which is complete comes it supersedes that which is partial.” Love, being whole, takes precedence over knowl edge and prophecy, which are incomplete. Paul likens it to reach ing maturity. Love is the adult stage. Without it, people “talk like a baby, think like a baby, act like a baby.” Love is that which makes a man “outgrow childish things” and become mature.

This is almost exactly what Jesus means when he says, “Now you, you all must be mature, as your spiritual Father is mature.” To talk about unlimited retaliation is babyish; to speak of limited retaliation is childish; to advocate limited love is adolescent; to practice unlimited love is evidence of maturity. It is the Father’s desire that his sons become adults like himself.

To be perfect, then, really means to quit acting like a child and to grow up. Is this an impossible command or an unreasonable request for Jesus to make of his followers?"

"Without this love, Paul says, it’s like looking at your brother through a trick mirror (“through a glass, darkly”). He appears dis torted and misshapen and maybe inhuman. But with this love, you see him face to face as he really is. Your knowledge of him is no longer in part, but full. You’ll understand him as the Father and the fellowship understand you."

Is There Anything the Individual Can Still Do? Franz Jagerstatter

2007-03-23T02:17:00.000-04:00

Bio: An Austrian peasant, Franz Jägerstätter refused to serve in the Nazi army following Germany’s invasion of Austria. His courageous and singular refusal was based in a deeply pietistic Catholicism. His story, and his reflections, are a moving testimony to the moral responsibility of the individual as opposed to the obligations of the state. The excerpt that fol lows is from a letter written during his imprisonment.

Quotations:

"I believe that should have begun a hundred or even more years ago. But as long as we live in this world, I believe it is never too late to save ourselves and perhaps some other soul for Christ. One really has no cause to be astonished that there are those who can no longer find their way in the great confusion of our day. People we think we can trust, who ought to be leading the way and setting a good example, are running along with the crowd. No one gives enlightenment, whether in word or in writing. Or, to be more exact, it may not be given. And the thoughtless race goes on, always closer to eternity. As long as conditions are still half-good, we don’t see things quite right, or that we could or should do otherwise."

"I realize, too, that today many words would accomplish little more than make one highly eligible for prison. Yet, in spite of this, it is not good if our spiritual leaders remain silent year after year. By “words” I mean, of course, instruction; but example gives direction. Do we no longer want to see Christians who are able to take a stand in the darkness around us in deliberate clarity, calmness, and confidence—who, in the midst of tension, gloom, selfishness, and hate, stand fast in perfect peace and cheerfulness— who are not like the floating reed which is driven here and there by every breeze—who do not merely watch to see what their friends will do but, instead, ask themselves, “What does our faith teach us about this?” or “Can my conscience bear this so easily that I will never have to repent?”

If road signs were ever stuck so loosely in the earth that every wind could break them off or blow them about, would anyone who did not know the road be able to find his way? And how much worse it is if those to whom one turns for information refuse to give him an answer or, at most, give him the wrong direction just to be rid of him as quickly as possible!"

Address to the Congres de la Paix, Victor Hugo

2007-03-23T02:12:00.000-04:00

Bio: Victor Hugo, the great French poet, dramatist and novelist, was active in many of the international peace conferences that were held in the 1840’s. His great novel, Les Miserables, contains within it many of the concepts that have been essential to a deep understanding of non-violence. The following selection * is a speech he delivered in Paris in 1851.

Quotations:

" Gentlemen, if someone four centuries ago, at a time when war raged from parish to parish, from town to town, from province to province—if someone had said to Lorraine, to Picardy, to Normandy, to Brittany, to Auvergne, to Provence, to Dauphine, to Burgundy, “A day will come when you will no longer wage war, when you will no longer raise men of arms against each other, when it will no longer be said that Normans have attacked the men of Picardy, and the men of Lorraine have driven back those of Burgundy; that you will still have differences to settle, interests to discuss, certainly disputes to solve, but do you know what you will have in place of men on foot and horseback, in place of guns, falconets, spears, pikes, and swords? You will have a small box made of wood, which you will call a ballot box. And do you know what this box will bring forth? An assembly, an assembly in which you will all feel you live, an assembly which will be like your own soul, a supreme and popular council which will decide, judge, and solve everything in law, which will cause the sword to fall from every hand and justice to rise in every heart. And this event will say to you, ‘There ends your right, here begins your duty. Lay down your arms! Live in peace!’ On that day you will be conscious of a common thought, common interests, and a common destiny. You will clasp each other’s hands and you will acknowledge that you are sons of the same blood and the same race. On that day you will no longer be hostile tribes, but a nation. You will no longer be Burgundy, Normandy, Brittany, Provence, you will be France. On that day your name will no longer be war, but civilization.” "

"Henceforth the goal of great politics, of true politics, is this:
the recognition of all the nationalities, the restoration of the historical unity of nations and the uniting of the latter to civilization by peace, the relentless enlargement of the civilized group, the setting of an example to the still-savage nations; in short, and this recapitulates all I have said, the assurance that justice will have the last word, spoken in the past by might."

Letter to a Minister of State, Hermann Hesse

2007-03-23T02:01:00.000-04:00

Bio: A German novelist and poet, Hermann Hesse was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1946. He left Germany during World War I, to protest the violence that was rampant in that country, and became a citizen of Switzerland. The letter below, written in 1917 to a minister of state, challenges him to end the dilemma of war.

Quotations:

"Beethoven’s music and the words of the Bible said exactly the same to me. It was water from one Source, the only Source from which good comes to man. And suddenly I felt that your speech, Mr. Minister, and the speeches of your governing colleagues, now and then do not stem from this Source; they lack that which makes words valuable and meaningful. Your words lack love; they lack humanity.

Your speech shows a deep feeling of concern and responsibility for your people, for the army of your people, for the honor of your people. But it does not show a feeling for mankind. It means, in brief, a few ten thousand new human sacrifices.
You may possibly call my memories of Beethoven a sentimentality. The words of Christ and of the Bible you will, at least in public, regard with certain reverence.

But if you believe in only one of the ideals for which you are fighting this war—be it freedom of countries or of the seas, be it the political progress or the rights of the small nations—if you believe in only one of these ideals, in one of these non-egotistical thoughts in your soul—then, while reading your speech, you must recognize that it has not served this ideal. It has not served any ideal at all. It is not an expression and result of a belief, of a feeling, of a humane need."

"To conceal a great dilemma for the time being, for yourself and your people, to postpone great and important decisions (which a! ways demand sacrifices)—that’s why you gave your speech, and that’s why the other ruling parties give theirs. It’s understandable. It is easier for a revolutionary or for a writer than it is for a responsible statesman to recognize the human in a world situation and to draw conclusions from it. It is easier for one of us because we are not responsible for the tremendous depression which grips a people when it realizes that it has not reached its war aim, and it may possibly have sacrificed hundreds of thousands of people and milliards of “values.” "

"The moment in which you would do it could become extremely important for the world. Possibly you would find inner freedom. It could be that your eyes and ears would suddenly be opened. Your eyes and ears, Mr. Minister, have been trained for years to see theoretical goals instead of reality; they are—true, it was necessary!
—long since used to not seeing a great many of the things of reality, to overlook them, to deny them to yourself.

You know what I mean? Yes, you know. But the voice of a great poet, the voice of the Bible, the eternally clear voice of humanity that speaks to you from this art, maybe it will make you for a moment really see and hear. Ah, what you would see and hear! Nothing any more of a dearth of work and the prices of coal. Nothing any more of tonnage and of pacts, of loans and all the things which have long since become the realities for you. In their place you would see the world, our old patient world, as it lies strewn with corpses and dying, as it is torn and ruined, burnt and defiled. You would see soldiers who lie between the frontiers for days, and how they cannot chase away with their shattered hands the flies from the wounds from which they perish. You would hear the voices of the wounded, the cries of the insane, the clamor and accusations of mothers and fathers, of brides and sisters, the cry of hunger in the people."

"If it were only possible to achieve this! This hour of music, this return to the true reality! I know you would hear the voice of humanity. I know you would lock yourself in and cry. And the next day you would go and do what is your duty to humanity. You would forsake a few millions or milliards of money, you would consider a small loss of prestige, you would blow to the winds the thousands of things (things for which in reality you are still fighting alone), if necessary even your seat of Ministry. For it you would do what humanity is pleading for and hopes for from you in untold anguish and misery—you would be the first among the reigning to condemn this lamentable war. You would be the first among the responsible to express what secretly all are already feeling: that a half year, that a month of war, is costlier than all it can gain in return.

Then, Mr. Minister, we would never forget your name, and your deed would mean more to humanity than the deeds of all who have ever led and won the wars."

THE MEANING OF THIS HOUR, ABRAHAM J. HESCHEL

2007-03-23T01:29:00.002-04:00

[Note from Start L.: This man Rabbi Heschel is proof that Jews are not exterminating Palestine; Fake Jews (Hypocrites), NEVER REAL JEWS, ARE EXTERMINATING PALESTINE. Real Jews, people like Rabbi Heschel ARE GIVING their lives to PREVENT what Fake Jews ARE DOING IN THE NAME OF REAL JEWS. I find the following from Rabbi Heschel to be the most Sacred, humane essay that ever I have read.]

Bio: Rabbi Abraham J. Heschel, one of the most significant religious philosophers and interpreters of Judaism, was a professor at the Jewish Theological Seminary. In addition to his scholarly work, he was one of the strongest voices to oppose the war in Vietnam and was one of the founders of Clergy and Laity Concerned. He gave the following speech in March 1938 at a conference of Quaker leaders in Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany.

Quotations:

"We have trifled with the name of God. We have taken the ideals in vain. We have called for the Lord. He came. And was ignored. We have preached but eluded Him. We have praised but defied Him. Now we reap the fruits of our failure. Through centuries His voice cried in the wilderness. How skillfully it was trapped and imprisoned in the temples! How often it was drowned or distorted! Now we behold how it gradually withdraws, abandoning one people after another, departing from their souls, despising their wisdom. The taste for the good has all but gone from the earth. Men heap spite upon cruelty, malice upon atrocity.

The horrors of our time fill our souls with reproach and everlasting shame. We have profaned the word of God, and we have given the wealth of our land, the ingenuity of our minds and the dear lives of our youth to tragedy and perdition. There has never been more reason for man to be ashamed than now. Silence hovers mercilessly over many dreadful lands. The day of the Lord is a day without the Lord. Where is God? Why didst Thou not halt the trains loaded with Jews being led to slaughter? It is so hard to rear a child, to nourish and to educate. Why dost Thou make it so easy to kill? Like Moses, we hide our face; for we are afraid to look upon Elohim, upon His power of judgment. Indeed, where were we when men learned to hate in the days of starvation? When raving madmen were sowing wrath in the hearts of the unemployed?

Let modern dictatorship not serve as an alibi for our con science. We have failed to fight for right, for justice, for goodness; as a result we must fight against wrong, against injustice, against evil. We have failed to offer sacrifices on the altar of peace; thus we offered sacrifices on the altar of war."

"Our world seems not unlike a pit of snakes. We did not sink into the pit in 1939, or even in 1933. We had descended into it generations ago, and the snakes have sent their venom into the bloodstream of humanity, gradually paralyzing us, numbing nerve after nerve, dulling our minds, darkening our vision. Good and evil, that were once as real as day and night, have become a blurred mist. In our everyday life we worshiped force, despised compassion, and obeyed no law but our unappeasable appetite. The vision of the sacred has all but died in the soul of man. And when greed, envy and the reckless will to power came to maturity, the serpents cherished in the bosom of our civilization broke out of their dens to fall upon the helpless nations.

The outbreak of war was no surprise. It came as a long-expected sequel to a spiritual disaster. Instilled with the gospel that truth is mere advantage and reverence weakness, people succumbed to the bigger advantage of a lie—”the Jew is our misfortune”—and to the power of arrogance—”tomorrow the whole world shall be ours,” “the peoples’ democracies must depend upon force.” The roar of bombers over Rotterdam, Warsaw, London, was but the echo of thoughts bred for years by individual brains, and later applauded by entire nations. It was through our failure that people started to suspect that science is a device for exploitation, parliaments pulpits for hypocrisy, and religion a pretext for a bad conscience. In the tantalized souls of those who had faith in ideals, suspicion became a dogma and contempt the only solace. Mistaking the abortions of their conscience for intellectual heroism, many thinkers employ clever pens to scold and to scorn the reverence for life, the awe for truth, the loyalty to justice. Man, about to hang himself, discovers it is easier to hang others.

The conscience of the world was destroyed by those who were wont to blame others rather than themselves. Let us remember. We revered the instincts but distrusted the prophets. We labored to perfect engines and let our inner life go to wreck. We ridiculed superstition until we lost our ability to believe. We have helped to extinguish the light our fathers had kindled. We have bartered holiness for convenience, loyalty for success, love for power, wisdom for information, tradition for fashion."

"What was in the minds of our martyred brothers in their last hours? They died with disdain and scorn for a civilization in which the killing of civilians could become a carnival of fun, for a civilization which gave us mastery over the forces of nature but lost control over the forces of our self.

Tanks and planes cannot redeem humanity, nor the discovery of guilt by association nor suspicion. A man with a gun is like a beast without a gun. The killing of snakes will save us for the moment but not forever. The war has outlasted the victory of arms as we failed to conquer the infamy of the soul: the indifference to crime, when committed against others. For evil is indivisible. It is the same in thought and in speech, in private and in social life. The greatest task of our time is to take the souls of men out of the pit. The world has experienced that God is involved. Let us forever remember that the sense for the sacred is as vital to us as the light of the sun. There can be no nature without spirit, no world without the Torah, no brotherhood without a father, no humanity without attachment to God.

God will return to us when we shall be willing to let Him in into our banks and factories, into our Congress and clubs, into our courts and investigating committees, into our homes and theaters. For God is everywhere or nowhere, the Father of all men or no man, concerned about everything or nothing. Only in His presence shall we learn that the glory of man is not in his will to power, but in his power of compassion. Man reflects either the image of His presence or that of a beast.

Soldiers in the horror of battle offer solemn testimony that life is not a hunt for pleasure, but an engagement for service; that there are things more valuable than life; that the world is not a vacuum. Either we make it an altar for God or it is invaded by demons. There can be no neutrality. Either we are ministers of the sacred or slaves of evil. Let the blasphemy of our time not become an eternal scandal. Let future generations not loathe us for having failed to preserve what prophets and saints, martyrs and scholars have created in thousands of years. The apostles of force have shown that they are great in evil. Let us reveal that we can be as great in goodness. We will survive if we shall be as fine and sacrificial in our homes and offices, in our Congress and clubs, as our soldiers are on the fields of battle.

There is a divine dream which the prophets and rabbis have cherished and which fills our prayers, and permeates the acts of true piety. ills the dream of a world, rid of evil by the grace of God as well as by the efforts of man, by his dedication to the task of establishing the kingship of God in the world. God is waiting for us to redeem the world. We should not spend our life hunting for trivial satisfactions while God is waiting constantly and keenly for our effort and devotion.

The Almighty has not created the universe that we may have opportunities to satisfy our greed, envy and ambition. We have not survived that we may waste our years in vulgar vanities. The martyrdom of millions demands that we consecrate ourselves to the fulfillment of God’s dream of salvation. Israel did not accept the Torah of their own free will. When Israel approached Sinai, God lifted up the mountain and held it over their heads, saying: “Either you accept the Torah or be crushed beneath the mountain.”

The mountain of history is over our heads again. Shall we renew the covenant with God?"

LOVE IN ACTION, Thich Nhat Hanh

2007-03-23T01:17:00.000-04:00

Bio: A Vietnamese poet and scholar, Thich Nhat Hanh refuses to be identified with any of the factions in Vietnam, with the exception of the poor and the young. He is one of the major voices urging peace and social reconstruction in Vietnam, as the following poem illustrates. The second selection * deals with the non-violent struggle for peace in Vietnam.

Quotations:

"The nature of the struggle is not a doctrine to be materialized by a program of action; it is communication and love. Thus, its leaders must create and inspire love for the masses in the hearts of their people. They touch the people by altruistic acts born from their own love. When Nhat Chi Mai burned herself because she wanted to be a "torch in the dark night," she moved millions of Vietnamese. The force she engendered was the force of love for non-violent action." [Side note from Start Loving: I always felt more horror than anything at the self immolation of Buddhist monks in Vietnam. Last month in reading Dellinger, and close advisor of King, I learned that such an immolation by a Buddhist Monk was largely responsible for Dr. King coming out against the Vietnam war. It touched Dr. King's heart as nothing else had.]

"We have witnessed tragic and heroic scenes of love: a monk seated calmly before advancing tanks; women and children raising bare hands against clubs and grenades; hunger strikes held in patience and silence. Only love and sacrifice can engender love and sacrifice. This chain reaction is essential to the non-violent struggle. Thich Tri Quang did not make strategy; he fasted 100 days. And everyone who passed by the Duy Tan clinic at that time had to hold his breath.

"The usual way to generate force is to create anger, desire,and fear. But these are dangerous sources of energy because they are blind, whereas the force of love springs from awareness, and does not destroy its own aims. Out of love and the willingness to act, strategies and tactics will be created naturally from the circumstances of the struggle. Thus, the problems of strategy and tactics are of secondary importance. They should be posed, but not at the beginning."

"...Our struggle's purpose... the destruction of fanaticism and inhumanity, which are the real enemies of man."

"At a joint press conference with a Buddhist monk, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King declared, "both the colored people struggling for civil rights in the US and the Buddhist struggling for peace in Vietnam are bound to the cause of peace and social justice, and are determined to sacrifice themselves to achieve their goal."

"Westerners often misunderstand and see self-immolation as and act of violence. To the Vietnamese it is quite the opposite. By accepting extreme suffering, one lights the fires of compassion and awakens the hearts of the people, as Christ did. Among a number of Vietnamese who immolated themselves for peace were Thich Quand Duc, a monk, and Nhat Chi Mai, a yound girl student."

"Another means - the one most often used by Gandhi to communicate with the people - has been fasting. Thousends of Vietnamese, both as individuals and in groups, have fasted to try to end the war. One fasts to pray, to purify one's heart and strengthen the will - or to arouse the silent awareness and compassion of the population. In 1966, Venerable Thich Tri Quang fasted for 100 days, deeply affecting the people of Vietnam.

"There have been other painful sacrifice. In 1963, a girl student named mai Tuuyet An cut off her hand as a warning to the Diem regime, unleashing tremendous emotion among young people. In 1966, ten university students, Nhat Chi Mai among them, pleedged to kill themselves to try to end the war, but the church forbade them. A year later, Nhat Chi Mai burned herself.

"There have been strikes, business licenses returned, resignations of university presidents, deans and professors (40 professors at Hue University), boycotts of classes and refusals to participate in the war. One typically Vietnamese act mentioned earlier has been the carrying of family altars into the streets to oppose tanks, a demonstration of the people's determination to pit the most precious symbols of their traditional values against the instruments of inhumanity and violence.

"Humanist efforts in Vietnam are suppressed by secret police, tear gas, suffocating gas, TNT, grenades, prisons and torture. False nuns and monks infiltrate the Buddhist movement, damaging its prestige and sowing seeds of fear. Extremists are thus encouraged to pervert and destroy the leaders and cadres of non-violent moments. Uncounted numbers of Buddhists and non-Buddhist leaders from all walks of life have been liquidated or sent to prison. In the School of Youth for Social Service, whose only aim is to help the peasants, eight young people have been kidnapped, six killed, eleven seriously wounded. Why? Because they refused to accept American aid or to participate in the war."

"The non-violent struggle in Vietnam goes on - amid vast pain and hardship. The world is just beginning to understand that peace everywhere, as well as the future of Vietnam, is linked to this movement. Its success and its contribution to the humanist revolution throughout the world depends upon your understanding and your help."

Active Nonviolence, Hildegaard Goss-Mayr

2007-03-23T00:40:00.000-04:00

Bio: An Austrian by birth, Hildegaard Goss-Mayr and her husband, Jean Goss, have worked extensively in South and Latin America, as well as in Europe, as field secretaries for the International Fellowship of Reconciliation. She writes out of deep experience and commitment to the principles of non-violence. The following selection is a talk given at CIDOC in August 1970.

Quotations:

"First of all I should like to present myself and my husband. We work together, and therefore if I speak of “us,” it is always the two of us.Jean and I have been secretaries of the International Fellowship of Reconciliation, which is an ecumenical peace movement, for a number of years. Our work, in particular during the time of the cold war, has been in East-West relations in Europe. We tried to establish a dialogue between Christians and non-Christians at the time when it was still very difficult to get through the “Iron Curtain.” Later on we built up a kind of peace lobby at the Vatican Council and we tried to push the bishops and theologians of the Catholic Church—we are Catholic ourselves—to develop a dynamic theology of peace. "

"Now I should like to ask you not to take the expression non violence in a negative sense. It is a very negative expression for something which is highly active, aggressive and strong; which is a force. We regret that we have not found a better word to express this type of action. I hope we will not limit ourselves to discuss this term but try to get the sense, the real meaning for which it stands.
There are in man three possibilities to react against injustice:

1. Once you have become aware of an injustice you can remain passive. This is the first and I think the most common attitude. Probably each one of us has had this experience in his own life. We have accepted passively many injustices, many things that we considered wrong. This is the most negative attitude that man can take.

2. The second is the traditional way of reacting against injustice, the way that has been taken in history in general, that is, to react against injustice, aggression and other forms of evil with the same means. We could say to oppose the institutional forms of violence with counter-violence in the effort to overcome existing injustices. This means to resort to the same means with which the established forces are operating. By doing this, we remain, however, within the system, that is to say, we accept to remain within the vicious circle of violence and counter-violence which necessarily creates new forms of violence, even if we succeed to overcome certain injustices through the application of violence. It must be made very clear that the means are linked to the aim. That is to say, the use of violence in the effort to overcome injustice necessarily creates new forms of suppression and exploitation. Acting in this way one remains within the vicious circle of arms’ trade, money speculation, verbal promises etc., and the mass of the people continue to suffer exploitation and injustice. There has been, perhaps more in our time than before, more serious research concerning a new way of fighting against injustice by using means that do not include hatred, violence, etc.

3. Perhaps this third way of reacting against an injustice could be explained through a very simple example. I have two children. If, for instance, my boy, who is ten and by nature violent, has done something wrong and if I use the same aggressive means as he does, we shall just hurt each other. He does not improve and I must tell myself; “Well, you have not done anything to overcome the evil. On the contrary. if one really wanted to solve the problem a teacher or parent would explain to the young person why his way of acting is wrong and help him to direct his forces toward positive tasks. That is to say, you dialogue, you begin to use certain methods and techniques in order to solve the conflict. In this process neither of us is diminished; on the contrary, he advances and I begin to understand him better and to learn about what he has to contribute. This force is the force of intelligence but also the force of truth, of love and justice that has been brought into play in this effort of solving a problem. This is the type of strength which is at the core of non-violent action.

There are always two aspects in this form of action which are in separable. If they are separated, we can no longer speak of an authentic non-violent action. These two aspects are: (1) a specific view of man, a certain attitude toward men and society, and (2) certain techniques and methods that correspond to this attitude and that incarnate this force in a given conflict. This technique and this view go together and cannot be separated."

"Those who work with this power of non-violence believe that every man has a conscience. This conscience may be uneducated, underdeveloped; it may, by tradition, be deformed; but it is there and if work is done, this conscience can be awakened, it can be challenged, it can be reached. I think this is truly an aspect of hope; if we cannot believe anymore that man is man, in this sense, in the final analysis, there is then no other way than to use the old traditional forms of violence in trying to solve our problems. This implies that man must never be identified with evil. As long as we identify him with evil we sacrifice him to an ideology. On the contrary the task of the non-violent action is to fight the injustice and to liberate men, those who suffer the injustice as well as those who are responsible for it. This therefore is a very constructive, positive and active form of living.

There are different ways of reaching this view. It may be through a humanistic attitude, it may be through religion, Buddhism, Hinduism or Christianity. Personally I believe that the essential point of the Christian faith is precisely this aspect. In this lies the revolutionary aspect of our faith. We are challenged, we are asked to reply in a radically new way to evil. It is our specific task to introduce this new way of fighting injustice into the historical situation that we are experiencing. For Christ has shown us a new view of man. Going beyond the Old Testament attitude of considering as one’s “neighbors” only those of one’s own clan, that is to say, the Jewish people, he teaches that every human being without exception, even the enemy, is in a very realistic sense our neighbor. This implies that we react to those who stand against us in a radically new way, a way that refuses all means that diminish, violate or destroy them, but which, on the contrary, tries to overcome the evil that separates us. Christ has not only taught this, he has lived it and furthermore has shown some techniques of how to live that force in a specific historical situation. He attacked the status quo of his time, those who betrayed men and were the privileged. He attacked the established Church of his time. He attacked the conscience of its representatives throughout the three years of his public life so strongly that they reacted in the traditional way with violence against him and crucified him. He was not crucified because he did nothing, but exactly because he attacked the injustice of his time in a very clear and precise way and because he spoke the truth. But he always respected men. Neither did he join the established groups of his time nor the guerrilla who operated in Israel, and who wanted to liberate the country from the Roman occupation. He showed a new way of fighting evil and he was willing to accept the consequences of his action.This is something we must bear in mind: The moment we attack an injustice, we must be prepared and willing to accept the sacrifices and the suffering that necessarily will result from our attack. For those whose conscience is attacked will as a first reaction use violence against us. This may be the cross for some of those engaged in a non-violent action."

"I think it has already become clear that this kind of action has nothing to do with a sentimental form of love or of being nice. It is a strategy, it is a way to act, it is a struggle that has to be carried on to the last consequences. If it remains only a single, sporadic action it will not succeed. This implies that non-violent workers have to undergo training—just as a soldier is trained for violent combat."

"I should like to add that it is significant that these methods, so far, have mainly been used by the poor; I think non-violence is essentially an arm of the poor, a force of liberation for them. Not only do they have no access to the arms of the rich, they often passively accept injustice because they are unaware of the power of resistance that lies within them because they are human beings. It is an essential task to make them aware of this force and train them to apply it. Most of the non-violent actions that have been realized in Latin America so far have been carried out by the very poor people, by industrial workers and campcsinos, on the plantations or in the barrios of the cities."

"A Few Basic Principles of Non-Violent Strategy

1. Analysis. One has to be aware of the injustice in order to be able to fight it. You have to analyze very well the situation, not only its local aspect but the whole context in which it occurs; for instance, if you work for economic and social justice in Latin America, you must make the complete analysis and see how it is linked to the economic and military policy of the rich countries.
2. Form action groups and train leadership. If there is no local leadership, an action will not succeed; I think so far this has been one of the weak points in non-violent action.
3. Then select a limited and well-defined first project. It must be at the level where the people with whom you work can understand it and where they are capable to solve it with their small forces. It is very important, in particular if you work with poor people for whom it may be the first time that they act, that this action makes them aware of their own strength. I remember working in MedellIn, Colombia, with a group in a barrio. There were about 5,000 people who had occupied land on a steep hill above the city. They had neither water nor electricity, canalization or schools. Many were unemployed. A priest who came to live with them developed leader ship and tried to stimulate initiatives among the people to change their dismal conditions. With his help a seminar on non-violent action was organized in which did participate not only representatives of the barrio but also students, teachers, social workers, intellectuals, priests, etc. It was for them, who knew poverty only from statistics, a challenging experience to live in the mud of the barrio. It helped to bridge the gap between the poor and the educated and to make them understand the necessity of working together for justice for all. The objective was, after having trans mitted the basic facts about non-violence and its methods of action, and after having analyzed their situation, to make the poor people themselves decide upon their first project and to outline their plan of action. They decided that their most urgent problem was water:they learned how to negotiate, how to bring their problem before the mind of the responsible people who live far from the reality of the poor—how to build up their forces with the help of conscious and educated people and to win the support of a growirig section of the population. They learned to use their imagination and to try out their human, moral and political power in this first project. They did win and helped themselves to build their water pipes. From there they went on to electricity, schooling, labor, etc. They had experienced the power of man to work for change.
4. Expansion to the international level. Then, once you act against one injustice, you see how it is linked to others, nationally and internationally. Therefore in the future the strategy must be to join actions in Africa, Asia or Latin America where people are working, for instance for land reform or where they are suffering particularly from the exploitation by certain international companies or from certain economic policies of the industrialized countries, with efforts in Europe and in the United States which are directed at changing these injustices. This means to put pressure on our political, economic and cultural groups, and upon our Churches in order to finally transform this system of exploitation. We are facing a task that concerns humanity as such. It is impossible for the developing countries to bring about the necessary changes unless in the rich countries as well the change of our economic, political and military system is obtained."

DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS 1938, WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON

2007-03-23T00:14:00.000-04:00

Bio: A major figure in American non-violent history, William Lloyd Garrison was instrumental in getting the abolitionists to adopt the creed of non-violence. Garrison called for an abolition of capital punishment, ‘abstention from politics and abolition of all war, as well as the emancipation of the slaves. In 1838 he joined with Adin Ballou to found the New England Non-Resistance Society. The “Declaration of Sentiments” * which appears below was adopted by the American Peace Convention held in Boston in1838.

Quotations:

"We cannot acknowledge allegiance to any human government; neither can we oppose any such government, by a resort of physical force. We recognize but one King and Lawgiver, one Judge and Ruler of mankind. We are bound by the laws of a kingdom which is not of this world; the subjects of which are forbidden to fight; in which Mercy and Truth are met together, and Righteousness and Peace have kissed each other; which has no state lines, no national partitions, no geographical boundaries; in which there is no distinction or rank, or division of caste, or inequality of sex; the officers of which are Peace, its exactors Righteousness, its walls Salvation, and its gates Praise; and which is destined to break in pieces and consume all other kingdoms.

Our country is the world, our countrymen are all mankind. We love the land of our nativity, only as we love all other lands. The interests, rights, and liberties of American citizens are no more dear to us than are those of the whole human race. Hence, we can allow no appeal to patriotism, to revenge any national insult or injury. The Prince of Peace, under whose stainless banner we rally, came not to destroy, but to save, even the worst of enemies. He has left us an example, that we should follow his steps. “God commandeth his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”

We conceive that if a nation has no right to defend itself against foreign enemies, or to punish its invaders, no individual possesses that right in his own case. The unit cannot be of greater importance than the aggregate. If one man may take life, to obtain or defend his rights, the same license must necessarily be granted to communities, states, and nations. If he may use a dagger or a pistol, they may employ cannon, bomb-shells, land and naval forces. The means of self-preservation must be in proportion to the magnitude of interests at stake, and the number of lives exposed to destruction. But if a rapacious and blood-thirsty soldiery, thronging these shores from abroad, with intent to commit rapine and destroy life, may not be resisted by the people or magistracy, then ought no resistance to be offered to domestic troublers of the public peace, or of private security. No obligation can rest upon Americans to regard foreigners as more sacred in their persons than themselves, or to give them a monopoly of wrong-doing with impunity.

The dogma that all the governments of the world are approvingly ordained of God, and that the powers that be in the United States, in Russia, in Turkey, are in accordance with His will, is not less absurd than impious. It makes the impartial Author of human freedom and equality, unequal and tyrannical. It cannot be affirmed that the powers that be, in any nation, are actuated by the spirit, or guided by the example of Christ, in the treatment of enemies; therefore, they cannot be agreeable to the will of God; and, therefore, their overthrow, by a spiritual regeneration of their subjects, is inevitable.

We register our testimony, not only against all wars, whether offensive or defensive, but all preparations for war; against every naval ship, every arsenal, every fortification; against the militia system and a standing army; against all military chieftains and soldiers; against all monuments commemorative of victory over a foreign foe, all trophies won in battle, all celebrations in honor of military or naval exploits; against all appropriations for the defense of a nation by force and arms on the part of any legislative body; against every edict of government, requiring of its subjects military service. Hence, we deem it unlawful to bear arms, or to hold a military office.

As every human government is upheld by physical strength, and its laws are enforced virtually at the point of the bayonet, we cannot hold any office which imposes upon its incumbent the obligation to do right, on pain of imprisonment or death. We the fore voluntarily exclude ourselves from every legislative and judicial body, and repudiate all human politics, worldly honors, and stations of authority. If we cannot occupy a seat in the legislature. or on the bench, neither can we elect others to act as our substitutes in any such capacity.

It follows that we cannot sue any man at law, to compel him by force to restore any thing which he may have wrongfully taken from us or others; but, if he has seized our coat, we shall surrender up our cloak, rather than subject him to punishment.

We believe that the penal code of the old covenant, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, has been abrogated by Jesus Christ; and that, under the new covenant, the forgiveness instead of the punishment of enemies has been enjoined upon all his disciples, in all cases whatsoever. To extort money from enemies, or set them upon a pillory, or cast them into prison, or hang them upon a gallows, is obviously not to forgive, but to take retribution. “Vengeance is mine—I will repay, saith the Lord.”

The history of mankind is crowded with evidences, proving that physical coercion is not adapted to moral regeneration; that the sinful disposition of man can be subdued only by love; that evil can be exterminated from the earth only by goodness; that it is not safe to rely upon an arm of flesh, upon man, whose breath is in his nostrils, to preserve us from harm; that there is great security in being gentle, harmless, long-suffering, and abundant in mercy; that it is only the meek who shall inherit the earth, for the violent, who resort to the sword, shall perish with the sword. Hence, as a measure of sound policy, of safety to property, life, and liberty, of public quietude and private enjoyment, as well as on the ground of allegiance to Him who is King of kings, and Lord of lords, we cordially adopt the non-resistance principle, being confident that it provides for all possible consequences, will ensure all things needful to us, is armed with omnipotent power, and must ultimately triumph over every assailing force.

We advocate no jacobinal doctrines. The spirit of jacobinism is the spirit of retaliation, violence and murder. It neither fears God, nor regards man. We would be filled with the spirit of Christ. If we abide by our principles, it is impossible for us to be disorderly, or plot treason, or participate in any evil work: we shall submit to every ordinance of man, for the Lord’s sake; obey all the requirements of government, except such as we deem contrary to the commands of the Gospel; and in no wise resist the operation of law, except by meekly submitting to the penalty of disobedience.

But, while we shall adhere to the doctrines of non-resistance and passive submission to enemies, we purpose, in a moral and spiritual sense, to speak and act boldly in the cause of God; to as sail iniquity in high places and in low places; to apply our principles to all existing civil, political, legal, and ecclesiastical institutions; and to hasten the time when the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever.

It appears to us a self-evident truth that, whatever the Gospel is designed to destroy at any period of the world, being contrary to it, ought now to be abandoned. If, then, the time is predicted when swords shall be beaten into plough-shares, and spears into pruning hooks, and men shall not learn the art of war any more, it follows that all who manufacture, sell, or wield those deadly weapons, do thus array themselves against the peaceful dominion of the Son of God on earth.

Having thus briefly, but frankly, stated our principles and purposes we proceed to specify the measures we propose to adopt, in carrying our object into effect.

We expect to prevail through the foolishness of preaching— striving to commend ourselves unto every man’s conscience, in the sight of God. From the press, we shall promulgate our sentiments as widely as practicable. We shall endeavor to secure the cooperation of all persons, of whatever name or sect. The triumphant progress of the cause of Temperance and of Abolition in our land, through the instrumentality of benevolent and voluntary associations, encourages us to combine our own means and efforts for the promotion of a still greater cause. Hence we shall employ lecturers, circulate tracts and publications, form societies, and petition our state and national governments in relation to the subject of Universal Peace. It will be our leading object to devise ways and means for effecting a radical change in the views, feelings and practices of society respecting the sinfulness of war, and the treatment of enemies.

In entering upon the great work before us, we are not unmindful that, in its prosecution, we may be called to test our sincerity, even as in a fiery ordeal. It may subject us to insult, outrage, suffering, yea, even death itself. We anticipate no small amount of misconception, misrepresentation, calumny. Tumults may arise against us. The ungodly and violent, the proud and Pharisaical, the ambitious and tyrannical, principalities and powers, and spiritual wickedness in high places, may combine to crush us. So they treated the Messiah, whose example we are humbly striving to imitate. If we suffer with him, we know that we shall reign with him. We shall not be afraid of their terror, nor be troubled. Our confidence is in the Lord Almighty, not in man. Having withdrawn from human protection, what can sustain us but that faith which overcomes the world? We shall not think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try us, as though some strange thing had happened unto us; but rejoice, inasmuch as we are partakers of Christ’s sufferings. Wherefore, we commit the keeping of our souls to God, in well-doing, as unto a faithful Creator. “For everyone that forsakes houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for Christ’s sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit everlasting life.”

Finally, relying upon the certain and universal triumph of the sentiments contained in this Declaration, however formidable may be the opposition arrayed against them, in solemn testimony of our faith in their divine origin, we hereby affix our signatures to it, commending it to the reason and conscience of mankind, giving ourselves no anxiety as to what may befall us, and resolving, in the strength of the Lord God, calmly and meekly to abide the issue."

Religious Satyagraha, M.K. Gandhi

2007-03-23T00:05:00.000-04:00

Bio: The prophet of 20th-century non-violence, Gandhi was to the Indian people a spiritual leader, a po litical realist, and a charismatic personal leader. His life view is deeply part of the religious and philo sophical teachings of Hinduism and the ethics of Christianity. His writings and his life attest to his belief in the power of truth, the redemptive power of suffering, and the total equality of all men.

Quotations:

"Mixing up of motives is damaging in any species of Satyagraha, but in religious Satyagraha it is altogether inadmissible. It is fatal to use or allow religious Satyagraha to be used as a cloak or a device for advancing an ulterior political or mundane objective."

The Time of My Commitment, George Fox

2007-03-22T23:42:00.000-04:00

Bio: of temptation who, not without great danger to yourself, are doing all you can to force your brother into danger? Do you deserve to be delivered from evil, that is, from the evil being, to whose impulse you submit yourself, and by whose spirit you are now guided, in contriving the greatest possible evil to your brother?

Quotations:

"...God is my wittnesse, by whom I am moved to give this forth for truths sake, from him whom the world calls George ffox, who is the son of God..."

"...I told them, I knew from whence all wars arose, even from lust, according to James’ doctrine; and that I lived in the virtue of that life and power that took away the occasion of all wars."

"but I had faith in God, and believed I should be delivered in his time; for the Lord had said to me before, that I was not to be removed from the place yet, being set there for a service which he had for me to do. .
All that pretend to fight for Christ, are deceived; for his kingdom is not of this world, therefore his servants do not fight. Fighters are not of Christ’s kingdom, but are without Christ’s kingdom; his kingdom starts in peace and righteousness, but fighters are in the lust; and all that would destroy men’s lives, are not of Christ’s mind, who came to save men’s lives. Christ’s kingdom is not of this world; it is peaceable: and all that are in strife, are not of his kingdom.

All that pretend to fight for the Gospel, are deceived; for the Gospel is the power of God, which was before the devil, or fall of man was; and the gospel of peace was before fighting was. Therefore they that pretend fighting, are ignorant of the Gospel; and all that talk of fighting for Sion, are in darkness; for Sion needs no such helpers. All such as profess themselves to be ministers of Christ, or Christians, and go about to beat down the whore with outward, carnal weapons, the flesh and the whore are got up in themselves, and they are in a blind zeal..."

"All such as pretend Christ Jesus, and confess him, and yet run into the use of carnal weapons, wrestling with flesh and blood, throw away the spiritual weapons. They that would be wrestlers with flesh and blood, throw away Christ’s doctrine; the flesh is got up in them, and they are weary of their sufferings. Such as would revenge themselves, are out of Christ’s doctrine. Such as being stricken on one cheek, would not turn the other, are out of Christ’s doctrine: and such as do not love one another, nor love enemies, are out of Christ’s doctrine."

Our Father, Desiderius Erasmus

2007-03-22T23:31:00.000-04:00

Bio: The man who symbolized the Renaissance, Deside rius Erasmus was a humanist, a monk, and a priest. He preached the contradiction of war and Christian ity, and called for a return to a simpler, more pure form of Christian faith. The excerpt below * was taken from The Complaint of Peace, Erasmus’ mas terful polemic against war and the selfish political motivations that caused war.

Quotations:

"Our Father,” says he; 0 hardened wretch! can you call him Father, when you are
just going to cut your brother’s throat? “Hallowed be thy name”:
how can the name of God be more impiously unhallowed, than by mutual bloody murder among you, his sons? “Thy kingdom come”: do you pray for the coming of his kingdom, while you are endeavoring to establish an earthly despotism, by spilling the blood of God’s sons and subjects? “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”: his will in heaven is for peace, but you are now meditat ing war. Dare you to say to your Father in heaven: “Give us this day our daily bread,” when you are going, the next minute per haps, to burn up your brother’s corn-fields, and had rather lose the benefit of them yourself, than suffer him to enjoy them unmo lested? With what face can you say, “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us,” when, so far from for giving your own brother, you are going, with all the haste you can, to murder him in cold blood, for an alleged trespass that, after all, is but imaginary? Do you presume to deprecate the danger of temptation who, not without great danger to yoursell, are doing all you can to force your brother into danger? Do you deserve to be delivered from evil, that is, Irom the evil being, to whose impulse you submit yourself, and by whose spirit you are now guided, in contriving the greatest possible evil to your brother?"

Nonviolence VS the Mafia, Danilo Dolci

2007-03-22T23:14:00.000-04:00

Bio: Danilo Dolci went to northwestern Sicily in 1952 to work with the people there, people caught in desperate poverty. He has sought to educate the people to their own worth and to the effectiveness of concerted, non-violent action (including work strikes, public fasts and marches). Dolci and the people themselves have begun to erode the power of the Mafia.

The first selection was submitted by Dolci to the War Resisters’ International Triennial Conference. The second selection deals with the work of various
study centers in Sicily.

Quotations:

"The problem of our new revolution is to find how best to eliminate exploitation, murder, the investment of energy in weapons of destruction—how to pro-yoke chain reactions not of hate and death but of new constructiveness, of new quality of life.

It is easy to doubt the efficacy of non-violent revolution while it has yet to be proved, historically and systematically, that it can change structures. But in a world tired of murder, betrayal, point less death, there can be a more direct appeal to people’s con sciences when a movement for change is both robust and non violent."

"After fuller discussion, we decided on a day’s fast by 1,000 people, to be followed by a “strike in reverse”—working on a dilapidated country road. The people joined in with scarcely any fear at all, despite massive intervention by the police—because they knew they weren’t doing anybody any harm: and within a few days they had succeeded as never before in penetrating the public conscience with their protest and their own positive proposals.

With this profound capacity for awakening consciences, non violent action is also revolutionary in that it activates other forces that are revolutionary in different ways. And everyone who wants change makes the sort of revolution he can."

"Sometimes we may admire violent revolutionary forces not be cause they are the only possible ones, or the most suitable to the circumstances, but because where they are active they are often the only ones brave enough to exist at all. But anyone who thinks war the highest form of struggle, or the means of resolving conflicts, still has a very limited vision of man. Anyone with effective revolutionary experience knows—and has to admit—that to succeed in changing a situation he must have not only a material appeal hut a higher moral appeal; he knows that the appeal to truer principles, to a superior ethic, itself becomes an element of strength: and thus his action is revolutionary also insofar as it helps create new feelings, new abilities, new culture, new instincts—a new human nature."

"Which are more numerous—those who would gain by changes, or those who think they benefit from maintaining the status quo?

There are thousands of millions of people in the world at present excluded from progress. By interpreting and expressing the profound needs of these people, by helping them to take stock of their problems, by helping them to initiate enterprises of every kind, at every level, and to press effectively for changes, we can activate a positively revolutionary force."

"Many revolutionary movements, though good at arousing con sciences and effective in protest and pressure, suffer from weakness on their constructive front. But the demolition of old systems and the building of new organic groups should be simultaneous, co ordinated activities which potentiate each other: the growth of con vincing alternatives encourages attack on the old groups, while the loss of authority of the old structures facilitates development of the new.
I refer to the dam built on the Iato river: even though this “laboratory” is only a tiny part of the world, and still in its early stages, the sequence of events there provides a useful example.

A desperate population was dominated by the Mafia, strong through its political connections: there was no prospect of change. Together with the more enlightened people, we begin to seek possible remedies. The necessity and feasibility of building a large dam to irrigate the zone are established. Educational activity at the grass roots so that people understand what a dam is. Pressure, by a few at first, then growing ever wider and more continual, until the dam is started. The workers on the dam site form a trade union: jobs are no longer got through the Mafia, which loses prestige. Local mafiosi are publicly denounced; their relationship with the two powerful politicians from the area is likewise denounced; and two politicians are dropped from the Italian Government. Construction work is speeded up. Creation of the first (though still rudimentary) centers for promotion of a democratic irrigation syndicate to ensure non-Mafia water supply. Co-operatives are formed. In the neighboring Belice valley, pressure has begun for the construction of another, bigger dam; communal and intercommunal centers for organic planning are formed, and meanwhile another center is growing up at which people will learn the techniques of planned development with active involvement of the whole population."

"—disown violence, above all in an area where thousands of persons have been murdered, 520 by the Mafia alone, since the war, and where violence is the only accepted law. We look upon violence, in all its forms, as a temptation to be resisted, as a festering evil...."

"Little by little, as We have been able to experiment for ourselves and discuss our problems with our friends, we have come to
clearer idea of our aims. They are these we must:

Work assiduously and eschew violence for a new reality based on our sacrifice in lull awareness that it it sometimes becomes necessary to struggle to achieve our aims, our methods must he without reproach, since the end cannot be disassociated from the means, and in the knowledge that our every action has its inevitable consequences;
-work in conformity with the truth, while recognizing, at the same time, how difficult it can be to know what to do for the best;
—open our hearts to the highest moral values, wherever they may lie, so that the individual may have the opportunity of choosing his right road, so that the correct lessons may be learned from the most varied experiences;
—work in accordance with a plan of education and reform, which, while taking into account the complexity of life, shall bring into locus the objectives of the various groups of society and weld them into one harmonious, all-embracing order, so that, by bringing pressure to bear from within both on the quality and structure of society, one may seek to enhance the value of all men and all things.

The more perfect the methods, the more perfect the results; but nothing is perfect that has not the creation of life as its object."

Dorothy Day

2007-03-22T22:33:00.000-04:00

Bio: A Communist in her 20’s and a convert to Catholicism during the Depression years, Dorothy Day is the founder and major directive force of the Catholic Worker Movement, known for its hospitality houses and rural communities. She is a humble, deeply spiritual woman who has fed the hungry, clothed the naked, and sheltered the homeless. She has nourished many of the radical Catholic figures of the day, and is known for her long-time peace witness.

The first selection * is from the Fall Appeal (there is also a Spring Appeal) that she writes for The Catholic Worker to raise funds for her work at St. Joseph’s House, 36 East First Street, New York, 10003, and was dated October 1971. The second selection * enunciates principles of the Catholic Worker Movement that have been influenced by the thought and experiences of Dorothy Day.

Quotations:

"St. Augustine has some good advice about voluntary poverty which enables us all to do the works of mercy: “Find out how much God has given you, and from it take what you need; the remainder which you do not require is needed by others. The superfluities of the rich are the necessities of the poor. Those who retain what is superfluous possess the goods of others.”

To serve others, to give what we have is not enough unless we always show the utmost respect for each other and all we meet."

"And I think too that that is what our soup line means. All the young students who live with us show their respect by doing the menial jobs, cleaning toilets, scrubbing floors, washing dishes. Men from this Bowery area also help with the mailing of the 80,000 copies of The Catholic Worker each month. It is a community activity, a little “industry” in which all share in the profits, those profits meaning a place to live, food, clothing, companion ship, etc. Of course it is work which men need most. We are ever conscious of that. But we all have that; we are self-employed, with no bosses! And no wages! “From each according to his ability and to each according to his need.” Or, as St. Paul puts it, “Let your abundance supply their want.” So God bless us all, and you too, who have helped us over the years, and will again, we know."

"IN ECONOMICS—because the guiding principle is production for profit and because production determines needs. A just order would provide the necessities of life for all, and needs would deter mine what would be produced. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Today we have a non-producing class which is maintained by the labor of others with the consequence that the laborer is systematically robbed of that wealth which he produces over and above what is needed for his bare maintenance.

IN PSYCHOLOGY—because capitalist society fails to take in the whole nature of man but rather regards him as an economic factor in production. He is an item in the expense sheet of the employer. Profit determines what type of work he shall do. Hence, the deadly routine of assembly lines and the whole mode of factory production. In a just order the question will be whether a certain type of work is in accord with human values, not whether it will bring a profit to the exploiters of labor.

IN MORALS—because capitalism is maintained by class war. Since the aim of the capitalist employer is to obtain labor as cheaply as possible and the aim of labor is to sell itself as dearly as possible and buy the products produced as cheaply as possible, there is an inevitable and persistent conflict which can only be overcome when the capitalist ceases to exist as a class. When there is but one class the members perform different functions but there is no longer an employer/wage-earner relationship.

TO ACHIEVE THIS SOCIETY WE ADVOCATE:

A complete rejection of the present social order and a non violent revolution to establish an order more in accord with Christian values. This can only be done by direct action since political means have failed as a method for bringing about this society. Therefore we advocate a personalism which takes on ourselves responsibility for changing conditions to the extent that we are able to do so. By establishing Houses of Hospitality we can take care of as many of those in need as we can rather than turn them over to the impersonal “charity” of the State. We do not do this in order to patch up the wrecks of the capitalist system but rather because there is always a shared responsibility in these things and (lie call to minister to our brother transcends any consideration of economics. We feel that what anyone possesses beyond basic needs does not belong to him but rather to the poor who are without it.

We believe in a withdrawal from the capitalist system so far as each one is able to do so. Toward this end we favor the establishment of a distributist economy wherein those who have a vocation to the land will work on the farms surrounding the village itself. In this way we will have a decentralized economy which will dispense with the State as we know it and will be federationist in character as was society during certain periods that preceded the rise of national states.

We believe in worker-ownership of the means of production and distribution, as distinguished from nationalization. This is to be accomplished by decentralized co-operatives and the elimination of a distinct employer class. It is revolution from below and not (as political revolutions are) from above. It calls for widespread and universal ownership by all men of property as a stepping stone to a communism that will be in accord with the Christian teaching of detachment from material goods and which, when realized, will express itself in common ownership. “Property, the more common it is, the more holy it is,” St. Gertrude writes.

We believe in the complete equality of all men as brothers under the Fatherhood of God. Racism in any form is blasphemy against God who created all mankind in his image and who offers redemption to all. Man comes to God freely or not at all and it is not the function of any man or institution to force the Faith on anyone. Persecution of any people is therefore a serious sin and denial of free will.

We believe further that the revolution that is to be pursued in ourselves and in society must be pacifist. Otherwise it will proceed by force and use means that are evil and which will never be out grown, so that they will determine the END of the revolution and that end will again be tyranny. We believe that Christ went beyond natural ethics and the Old Dispensation in this matter of force and war and taught non-violence as a way of life. So that when we fight tyranny and injustice and the class war we must do so by spiritual weapons and by non—cooperation. Refusal to pay taxes, refusal to register for conscription refusal to lake part in civil—defense drills, non-violent strikes, withdrawal from the system are all methods that can be employed in this fight for justice.

We believe that success, as the world determines it, is not the criterion by which a movement should be judged. We must be prepared and ready to face seeming failure. The most important thing is that we adhere to these values which transcend time and for which we will be asked a personal accounting, not as to whether they succeeded (though we should hope that they do) but as to whether we remained true to them even though the whole world go otherwise."

Not the Smallest Grain of Incense, Tom Cornell

2007-03-22T22:25:00.000-04:00

Bio: Tom Cornell, head of the Catholic Peace Fellowship, and an associate editor of The Catholic Worker, has been active in all forms of peace education and activism. This selection * is a statement made before sentencing at his trial in November, 1966 for destruction of his draft card. On May 27, 1968, the Supreme Court ruled 7-1 to uphold the 1965 law which makes it a crime to burn or otherwise destroy a draft card; Tom Cornell began to serve his sentence in June
1968.

Quotations:

"The Justice Department took it all with unaccustomed gravity. The gods had been mocked, and that could not be ignored.

It is characteristic of states to gather power unto themselves. With the accumulation of power they quickly forget the source and the purpose of that power. They tend to take on divine prerogatives. God alone has dominion over human life. Yet the state usurps that dominion by exacting capital punishment and by prosecuting war, always, mind you, in self-defense.

Throughout the Old Testament there is the recurring theme of idolatry. The early Christians were well aware of it too. Less so today. I submit, Your Honor, that the state today, the Government of the United States of America, is just as much a pagan god as Caesar was in imperial Rome, and that our society is just as guilty of idolatry as the worshipers at Caesar’s pagan altars. This new Moloch demands the bodies of our young men in its service, the service of death rather than the service of life, and little by little it exacts the souls of all of us as well, so that in the name of anti-communism and anti-totalitarianism, we are moving toward universal conscription. As part of this process, the Congress took a small piece of paper, of no significant value to anyone but a bar tender, and said over it, “Hoc est enim Corpus Meum.” The sacrament of the state then had to be honored. So the act of burning the draft cards was for me an act of purposeful desecration and an act of purification. Let not any state have such trappings, or arrogate to itself such prerogatives. It is blasphemy! I suspect that the great public interest that was generated by this symbolic act came from a dim awareness in the public mind that a blasphemous profanation had been made of the state religion. How else explain it, that burning an insignificant piece of paper is a crime, but that burning children in napalm is sacred duty?"

Militant Non-Violence, William Sloane Coffin

2007-03-22T21:51:00.000-04:00

Bio: Rev. William Sloane Coffin is a chaplain at Yale University, and one of the first men in the nation to challenge this country’s policy in Vietnam from a moral perspective. The following selection well illustrates this view.

Quotations:

"What we need to recognize is Gandhi’s truth that exploitation is the essence of violence, that violence in its cruelest form is not blue collar or no collar, but white collar; not individual and messy, but organized and efficient, antiseptic and profitable. The violent ones are less the mugging drug addicts that inhabit slum tenements than the modern-day Ahabs who occupy pentagonal palaces, skyscrapers like the Ling Tower, the house that: weapons built, and who never see blood unless their secretaries have a nosebleed.

To see how violent a world we live in, we have only to engage in an exercise of imagination: There are now three billion people on this planet. Reduce these peoples proportionately to a town of 1,000 and 60 will be Americans, 940 the rest of the world’s population. The 60 Americans will control half the total income of the town. The 60 Americans will enjoy on an average fifteen times as much of all material goods as the rest of the citizens. The 60 Americans will enjoy a life expectancy of 71 years while the 940 on an average will die before they are 40.

Now we can see how ridiculous it is to define violence in physical terms alone. For a man killed by a bullet is no less dead than a man who has died from a disease resulting from eradicable poverty. When you stop to think of it, poverty is no longer inevitable; there fore it is intolerable. It is no more a private tragedy; it is now a public crime.

But there are other forms of violence and death, the kinds suffered by the 60 Americans. American production is now power fully oriented toward consumption. And as consumption seems almost limitless, so too appears production. But to produce something, something else has to be destroyed, and the evidence of destruction is all about us. “Modern production,” write two commentators, “has obscured the sun and the stars, and it has made the cities unlivable. It chews up great forests and drinks whole lakes and rivers, and it consumes men’s religions and traditions and makes nonsense of their notions of the aims of education. It periodically slays heaps of men in war, and it daily mangles the spirits of millions of others in meaningless labor.”

Oh for a President who could repeat, in place of clichés whose application has long since ceased, these words of the poet-king so eerie in their timeliness:

The bay trees in our country are all wither’d
And meteors fright the fixed stars of heaven;
The pale-f ac’d moon looks bloody on the earth
And lean-look’d prophets whisper fearful change.

But what is to he done-non-violently? One obvious thing is to speak Elijah's truth that we dwell in a land of idol worshipers. Like Willy Loman we have the wrong dreams. The wrongness comes through most poignantly when talking with blue-collar Workers who, unlike blacks today amid unlike whites during the Depression are not excluded from the American pie; they are part of time American dream. Only what kind of a dream is it to return from spirit-mangling work to payments on the car, a mortgage on lime house, stultifying TV programs, an over-heated teen-age daughter amid a D-in-English car-smashing son? But who, particularly in the Church has had the candor and courage to tell them of their wrong dreams, to tell them that the wonders of man do not consist in consumer goods, to tell them that their wretchedness is interior and therefore that it is wrong to seek to scapegoat long haired students, liberal professors, the Vietcong, the UN?

In its most dangerous form, idol worshiping is reflected in the government and we need not bother with the obvious examples today."

"But what impresses me is that if High Noon encounters with nuclear weapons represent manliness, then we simply have to reinvent manhood.

And this, I think, is what non-violence is really all about: a new kind, or perhaps a New Testament kind, of manhood, patterned alter the person of Jesus.

I have only begun to think about this new kind of manhood, but this much at least seems clear. If the aim of non-violence is reconciliation and healing, both for the individual and society, then the emphasis must be not on being right but on being loyal to a truth that is good for all. It is not we who must prevail but a truth that is as true for our adversaries as it is for us. Clearly this demands an openness to, a willingness to learn from, our adversaries. (Actually a refusal to learn from another always reflects doubts about one’s own position.) In short, the fight is for everyone. Every confrontation should offer opportunities, as Gandhi would say, “for all to rise above their present conditions.” And this means we should avoid words or acts which inhibit the awakening of a decent response and only confirm us in our self-righteousness and self-pity."

"For until the adversary in power knows that non-violent men are willing to suffer for their beliefs, he will not be truly willing to listen to them, knowing he can count on their ultimate acquiescence to his power if not to his opinion. Of this we have had endless examples in recent years.

Somehow we have to combine a quality of openness with a quality of determination. We have to fight racial and class enemies, yet never as personal enemies. We have to become twice as militant and twice as non-violent, twice as tough and twice as tender, as only the truly strong can be tender.

That is why a Communion service is so meaningful to me. “After the same manner he took the cup, after he had supped, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood.’” That’s what we need—a new covenant with God and with Christ for a new kind of manhood. To this new covenant we must devote a great deal of thought. Perhaps we should inscribe on the exit doors of the church these words of Daedalus: “I go forth . . . to forge in the smith of my soul the uncreated conscience of my race.”

Cesar Chavez

2007-03-22T21:48:00.000-04:00

Bio: Dynamic, charismatic, deeply committed and deeply religious, Cesar Chavez is the leader of an unprecedented strike among migrant workers in California. Chavez is not a philosopher; he is an activist. It is through these actions that one can see a non-violence that is deeply rooted in his faith.

The first selection discusses the need for creativity in using non-violence as a method for social change. The second selection is the text of a statement that was made by Chavez at the completion of his twenty-five-day penitential fast in Delano, California, March
10, 1968.

Quotations:

"When people are involved in something constructive, trying to bring about change, they tend to be less violent than those who are not engaged in rebuilding or in anything creative. Non-violence forces one to be creative; it forces any leader to go to the people and get them involved so that they can come forth with new ideas. I think that once people understand the strength of non-violence— the force it generates, the love it creates, the response that it brings from the total community—they will not be willing to abandon it easily."

"I undertook this fast because my heart filled with grief and pain for the suffering of farm workers. The fast was first of all for me, and then for all of us in the union. It was a fast for non-violence and a call to sacrifice.

Our struggle is not easy. Those who oppose our cause are high and powerful and they have many allies in high places. We are poor, and our allies are few—but we have something the rich do not own. We have our own bodies and spirits and the justice of our cause as our weapon.

When we are really honest with ourselves we must admit that our lives are all that really belong to us. So it is how we use our lives that determines what kind of men we are. It is my deepest belief that only by giving our lives do we find life.

I am convinced that the truest act of courage, the strongest act of manliness, is to sacrifice ourselves for others in a totally non-violent struggle for justice. To be a man is to suffer for others.

God help us to be men."

Fetters of Injustice, Dom Helder Camara

2007-03-22T20:37:00.000-04:00

Bio: Dom Helder Camara, the Archbishop of Recife, Brazil, is one of the most respected spokesmen for non-violent revolution in the world today. His refusal to allow violence as a means for social change is most convincing, since his experience has been with the oppressed of the Third World. The following selection * is the text of a talk delivered in Geneva in January 1970 to the World Council of Church’s Consultation on Ecumenical Assistance for Development Projects.

Quotations:

"You have the joy of being men of faith, Christians. It is therefore important that I tell you that this message of mine is the outcome of prayer and personal intercession. Just because it sums up a great deal of my own experience as a shepherd in the Church in the northeast of Brazil (one of the most discussed and most traumatized places in the world), I asked Christ not to let me transmit a view which is too impassioned and too personal.

There are far more than two or three of us gathered here in his name; the master is therefore here in our midst. In every thought and word I shall bear in mind that he is present with us, listening to us, and that he will judge the statements that we make and the proposals that we submit.

I thank our Father for this atmosphere of faith, which enables me to speak to you as if I were standing before the supreme judge and rendering account to him of my thoughts, words, actions and omissions, when speaking to you about “development projects and concern for structural changes.

The present situation of mankind may be described briefly and objectively as follows: a sad reality, with marvelous prospects, yet the possibility (even the probability) of a tragic conclusion.

It is a sad fact that, according to the statement of the Beirut Conference (1968), 80% of the world’s resources are at the disposal of 20% of the world’s inhabitants: “While one segment of humanity is rich and growing richer, the rest will struggle in varying degrees of poverty and have little certainty of breaking out of their stagnation in the next decades.”

The prospects are marvelous because, as we all know, for the first time in history, man is in a position to fulfill the command of the creator to dominate nature and to complete his work of creation. For the first time the technological resources available could enable us “to promote the good of every man and of the whole man.”
The conclusion may be (and probably will be) tragic, owing to the blindness of the privileged 20% of mankind, who think it “normal” to spend 150 billion dollars per annum on armaments, but can hardly scrape together 10 billion for economic and social cooperation (to quote again from the Beirut Report).

Our responsibility as Christians makes us tremble. The northern hemisphere, the developed area of the world, the 20% who possess 80% of the world’s resources, are of Christian origin. What impression can our African and Asian brethren and the masses in Latin America have of Christianity, if the tree is to be judged by its fruits? For we Christians are largely responsibile for the unjust world in which we live.

Christianity is invoked in order to lead a sort of crusade against Communism. Christianity is invoked in order to combat the wave of hatred, deep-rooted resentment and terror which is rising every where. But what do the 20% who let 80% stagnate in a situation which is often sub-human—what right have they to allege that Communism crushes the human person? The 20% who are keeping 80% in a situation which is often sub-human—are they or are they not responsible for the violence and hatred which are beginning to break out all over the world?

During the course of centuries the injustices have become more and more firmly entrenched, and have perpetuated themselves to such an extent that we have come to accept them as the “social order” which should he defended and safeguarded. While all this was going on, we Christians have detached ourselves from the problems of this world to such an extent that we have made it easier for injustice to take root."

"What social order are people talking about? The one that we see today, that consists in leaving millions of God’s children in miserable poverty, should rather be called social disorder, systematized injustice. Private ownership? Is it not evident to everyone that on this point we Christians have abandoned the Fathers of the Church, and that we have ended by attributing divine right to private ownership, whereas God’s law says that the wealth of the world should be shared by all, and should never form odious, oppressive monopolies?"

"You have certainly observed what follies and cruelties are committed on the pretext of preventing subversion and combatting Communism.

The first consequence is that existing structures are maintained — structures in which centuries of violence are entrenched, for they protect the privileges of a minority at the expense of the poverty of millions. Totalitarian methods are adopted; informers are encouraged everyone suspects everyone else; liberty is completely suspended including freedom of speech. The atmosphere is one of complete insecurity, arbitrary imprisonment; moral and physical torture ate employed in order to extort confessions."

"It is inconvenient for the rich countries to work out effective changes in the socio-economic, political or cultural structures of the poor countries, for the very simple reason that the latter would then no longer need to provide the raw materials essential for the administration and expansion of the developing economies.

We should not delude ourselves: a change in structure in the underdeveloped countries is not possible without a change in structure in the developed countries. The expression must be taken literally. I do not mean merely a change in mentality with regard to the poor countries. I mean a profound change in international commercial policy. How much longer are we going to permit inter national trusts to make small groups of men fabulously wealthy, while they keep millions of others in slavery? I do not want to be told that modern corporations are becoming democratic because millions and millions of ordinary people are becoming shareholders and thus have control over the concern. Shareholders, yes, in the sense that they hold a few meager shares, but without any say in the management of the corporation, which is carried out anonymously, impassively and coldly by a group of people who do not mind coming face to face with those they have crushed."

"Therefore, let us render this service in the cause of peace: without measuring the sacrifices, try to prove that truth, love and faith, with the divine blessing, are capable of moving and breaking down the walls of Jericho."

Stations on the Road to Freedom, Dietrich Bonhoeffer

2007-03-22T20:32:00.000-04:00

Bio: Dietrich Bonhoeffer was the Lutheran pastor executed by Hitler for his resistance activities. A deeply religious, committed man, Bonhoeffer’s writings remain a challenge and inspiration to a new generation of committed men and women. This excerpt is from Letters and Papers from Prison, a collection of his works.

Quotations:

"Discipline

If you set out to seek freedom, then learn above all things to govern your soul and your senses, for fear that your passions and longing may lead you away from the path you should follow. Chaste be your mind and your body, and both in subjection, obediently, steadfastly seeking the aim set before them; only through discipline may a man learn to be free.

Action

Daring to do what is right, not what fancy may tell you, valiantly grasping occasions, not cravenly doubting— freedom comes only through deeds, not through thoughts taking wing.

Faint not nor fear, but go out to the storm and the action, trusting in God whose commandment you faithfully follow; freedom, exultant, will welcome your spirit with joy.

Suffering

A change has come indeed. Your hands, so strong and active, are bound; in helplessness now you see your action
is ended; you sigh in relief, your cause committing to stronger hands; so now you may rest contented.
Only for one blissful moment could you draw near to touch freedom;
then, that it might be perfected in glory, you gave it to God.

Death

Come now, thou greatest of feasts on the journey to freedom eternal;
death, cast aside all the burdensome chains, and demolish
the walls of our temporal body, the walls of our souls that are blinded,
so that at last we may see that which here remains hidden.
Freedom, how long we have sought thee in discipline, action, and suffering;
dying, we now may behold thee revealed in the Lord."

Christ's Teachings, Vinoba Bhave

2007-03-22T20:19:00.000-04:00

Bio: Vinoba Bhave was one of Gandhi’s closest and most trusted disciples. One of the most respected practitioners of non-violence in the world today, he has spent the last twenty years walking through India, begging land for the peasants of that country, and directing the land development movement. The selection here * is a translation of an article by Bhave in the journal Bhumiputra.

Quotations:

"Jesus Christ’s teaching can be summed up in three of his sayings: 1. Love thy neighbor as thyself. 2. Love thy enemy. 3. Love one another as I have loved you.
If Jesus had merely said: “Love thy neighbor,” that would have been axiomatic. If you love your neighbor, he will also love you, and if you abuse him, he too will do the same. So, to love him is in your self-interest. But Jesus added the words “as thyself.” This is deep thinking, and requires great effort to practice. How much love do we lavish on ourselves, how much affection on our bodies! Lavish the same on your neighbor. So said Jesus."

"One who serves God and acts according to his teaching truly worships.

Jesus therefore urged “Love thy enemy,” He did not say: Love thy enemy if he loves you. That way I lose initiative to others. This limits my effectiveness. When I say I hold the initiative in the process of love, my behavior is governed by love for everyone, no matter what others do to me. Then we can conquer the world with love. Gautama Buddha said this. “Hatred is not calmed by hatred. Conquer anger with love.”

Gandhi’s “satyagraha” (insistence on truth) was, I believe, a practical application of this principle."

"Jesus gave his third teaching to his followers toward the end. There would have been nothing new if he had merely said: “Love one another.” Most religious sects say this. But Jesus added “as I have loved you,” meaning, “Just as I gave my all for you, you do the same for your colleagues. Dedicate yourselves to this task.” This was his last message."

"The atomic weapons have sounded a clarion call to man to unite, or they will wipe him out.

I believe in Jesus Christ, but do not believe in circumscribing him within strictly sectarian or theological walls. To me Jesus was something far beyond any individual phenomenon. [Jesus] was Love and Compassion incarnate. We can carry his message to the people by serving them with love, mercy and compassion in our hearts. That message will spread despite you and me, because it is the innermost cry of the human heart."

"To unite hearts is therefore the most important task before us today."

An Open Letter to a Bishop, Philip Berrigan

2007-03-22T19:54:00.000-04:00

Bio: Father Philip Berrigan was the first priest in the United States to be imprisoned for his religious-political activity. Prior to his involvement with anti war activities he spent many years working with blacks in the Baltimore ghetto. it was this experience that led him to an understanding of the repressive nature of our society’s institutes and to a strong op position to the Vietnam war. He and eight others were indicted in 1971 on conspiracy charges, the original indictment vocalized by the late F.B.I. Di rector, J. Edgar Hoover—in a charge which was re jected by the jury in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

This is an open letter to Bishop William Baum, who was recently called by the Pope to Rome to take part in the Bishops’ Synod. Bishop Baum had asked for some reflections on priesthood, world justice and peace, which Father Berrigan answers in this letter.

Quotations:

"Despite the fact that we come from different frames of reference, and that the Berrigan view of the Gospel (Dan’s and mine) is radically different from the hierarchy’s, we will not admit that our own responsibilities differ from yours."

"We constitute the Church in chains—advocates of resistance to naked power, disproportionate wealth, racism, war-making. We want to express our fidelity to the Church and to the Chair of Peter, even as we sorrow over Christian myopia, hardness of heart and even cowardice."

"The Church in America—in fact, in the West as a whole—has accepted as religion a kind of cultural syncretism, culminating in near-perfect allegiance to the State. Not a few of its more prominent Bishops have even waited upon the Presidency like court jesters. And now the culture is being violently challenged, and the State doesn’t so much govern as rule by force. To whom do we turn?

A case in point is the Catholic response to the Indochinese war. It is a classic case of burning incense to Caesar. After twenty-two years’ involvement in Indochina (President Truman committed American support to the French in 1949); after millions of Indochinese deaths (6 to 8 might be a conservative estimate); after as many as 100,000 American dead (Pentagon figures are probably half the total); after war expenditures of 300 billion; after documented ecocide and genocide; after all this, thirty-two American Bishops have finally condemned the immorality of the war. (This was written before the Bishops’ statement of November, 1971.— Ed. ) "

"We have obviously surpassed the German Church in negligence both moral and criminal. (Resistance to Hitler, for example, meant totalitarian reprisal, which is not the case here.) Despite the clarity of Paul Vi’s stand, despite Constitutional protections, no Bishop has challenged the illegality of the war in serious fashion; no Bishop has broken patently immoral laws (the Apostles were martyred for refusing to obey the law); no Bishop (except Parrilla of Puerto Rico) has advocated non-violent resistance to the war (Mayor Lindsay of New York City, a nebulous liberal at best, advocated such a course two years ago). And only two or three Bishops have visited Catholic resisters in jail, at least two of them virtually apologizing for their action: “This visit is a spiritual work of mercy, which I would perform for any of my flock.” More to the point would be an explanation of why they themselves were not in jail.

Furthermore, no Bishop has questioned the marriage of Big Business and Big Military in Big Government, and how the marriage results in government by and for the wealthy and powerful. No Bishop has condemned the American rape of the developing world, nor the arms race in horror weapons, nor American arms salesmanship, nor the division of the world by superpowers.

On the contrary, the American episcopacy has docilely and silently stood by while their countrymen and spiritual sons established the American empire and ruled it with ruthless might. They stood by as spectator, or advocate, while their country plunged into perpetual hot and cold warring, spent 1¼ trillion dollars on war and weapons since 1946, and filled up Arlington Cemetery with the dead of Korea, the Dominican Republic, and Indochina. And yet, the Church they lead, like the Savior, is come “to give life, and to give it more abundantly.” What a gross irony!

Do I exaggerate? Perhaps. Some Catholics, who have suffered for dedication to Gospel and Church, would go much further, how ever. One layman I know, a superb student of Gospel politics and Gandhian non-violence currently in jail, would say (his with a snort: “Shepherds? There is not one in the American Church! They are upper-management people for the most part. And they are the State’s sheep!” Of him, I must say that he is capable of transcending mediocrity. He remains loyal in a sense that most Catholics and most Bishops cannot understand.

Perhaps in the above you might perceive my difficulty in speculating about the priesthood, and how it might serve man as physician and prophet. For who will finally legislate as to training, experience, freedom? And who will provide what is most crucial of all—example? The men and women who can address the subject realistically are concerned mainly with witnessing against institutionalized terror and death—and they are in severe jeopardy or in jail."

"In effect, thinking Catholics make little distinction between treatment by Church and State. They know that both desire malleability and conformity, that both fear conscience, that both are self-righteous and dogmatic, that both are ruthless in handling deviants. To be fair, the Church is quicker to forgive and to forget. On the other hand, the State may be quicker to learn. But the point is that Catholics increasingly tend to ignore the official Church since it says so little real about the questions of life and death, and lives less than it says. How could it be otherwise? they ask. The official Church is not about the Gospel, or the plight of what Pope John called “the majority of men.” Therefore, how can it speak to either issue?

The understanding from this quarter is simply this: both Church and Stale are vast, sprawling bureaucracies which share an insufferably arrogant assumption that they offer the fundamental answers to the human condition. The understanding, further, is that, despite claims to the contrary, Church and State have brought Western civilization to its nadir, and have destroyed other civilizations in the process.

Critics have learned, or are learning in swelling numbers from history as well as from the Gospels, that nothing much makes sense except death to self and conversion to Christ and neighbor. All the virtues exemplified by the Lord—poverty, freedom in responsibility, the politics of community, willingness to risk jail and death for the exploited person—all these attack head-on the conceptions and realities of bureaucracies whether in Church or State. The goals of bureaucracies are simply not the goals of Christ."

"The Catholic priest in America—and in the West generally—-is more of a cultural phenomenon than he is a Gospel man. He is a nationalistic, white supremacist, and uncritical toward affluence and its source. His training reflects nuances of these cultural fixations, but, beyond that, it schools him merely in neutrality toward life. By that I mean, he tends to take a purely institutional view of threats to life, whether they be its abuse or destruction. Indeed, if he is sensitive, he will go through immense convolutions to escape such brutalities. Or if he is hardened, he will advocate them, or remain casual in face of them.

Therefore the problem becomes—how to instill convictions strong enough to resist dehumanization in oneself, in others, in structures. How to instruct him in non-violence as a way of life, as mark of the new man, as instrument of human revolution and social regeneration? How to teach him the realities of power in all its nuances, from the will to dominate others to the will to exploit whole nations and peoples? How to toughen him SO that one will understand and accept persecution, contempt, ostracism, jail, or death on account of conscience and (above all) on account of the suffering brother’? How to infuse him with such sensitivity to human rights and dignity that one will confront violence in every turn of his life—in himself, in the culture, in the State? How to convince him that Christ’s man must integrate word and act, in full recognition that this might lead him to death, even as it did his Lord?

I don’t know, because one can neither teach the above nor administer it. But the Church can beg the grace of God, the Church can provide the setting; even though it be modern catacombs, the Church can begin, realizing that her life must always constitute beginnings, and never endings. And if such fidelity means a vocation of opposition to Powers and Principalities as they operate in government and in the circle of prestige for which the government exists, so be it. If it means the outlawry of the Church, persecution . . . the Lord spoke of that too: “The time will come when those who kill you will think they are doing a service to God.” But in the process, the Church would serve humanity, would even help to give humanity a future on this planet which it could not otherwise have.

As for the impending deliberations on world justice and peace, I have anguished questions about them. Do the American Bishops accept the implications of their country’s control over one-half the world’s productive capacity and finance? Do they realize that, despite our affluence, we have institutionalized poverty for perhaps one-quarter of our own people, plus millions in the developing world? Will they admit that these appalling realities are not an accident, but a cold calculation, that they follow the logic of profit and policy? Can they comprehend that war, particularly modern war, decides what nation or “security bloc” will control the profits, and that on the success or failure of the Indochinese war hinges the American Open Door to the developing world? (Policy-makers fear that if the Indochinese force us out, certainty will spread among the world’s poor that wars of liberation can succeed.) Do they understand that a few hundred American corporations, with hundreds of billions in assets and inter national holdings, are empires in their own right, exerting political and economic dominion wherever they are? To deliberate justice and peace while overlooking such realities is both ignorant and dishonest. Just as it is dishonest to deny that while most men starve, most Bishops live in comfort and affluence, welcome the dividends of offending corporations, and remain discreetly silent before the excesses of capitalism."

A Meditation from Catonsville, Dan Berrigan

2007-03-22T19:35:00.000-04:00

Bio: Father Daniel Berrigan is one of the most passionate and articulate members of the growing Catholic radical movement. His actions have been disturbing to many people; what he says is painful to hear. Daniel Berrigan is a poet, a priest, a felon.

The first selection is a letter written by Father Bern gan and smuggled out of the federal prison in Dan bury, Conn., where he was incarcerated. The state ment was made on the occasion of the end of a fast by war resisters transferred from Danbury to a prison in Springfield, Mo. The second selection is a meditation by Father Berrigan written before he and eight other men and women destroyed draft records in Catonsville, Maryland in May 1968.

Quotations:

"For which act we shall, beyond doubt, be placed behind bars for some portion of our natural lives, in consequence of our inability to live and die content in the plagued city, to say “peace, peace” when there is no peace, to keep the poor poor, the homeless, the thirsty and hungry homeless, thirsty and hungry.
Our apologies, good friends, for the fracture of good order, the burning of paper instead of children, the angering of the orderlies in the front parlor of the charnel house. We could not, so help us God, do otherwise. For we are sick at heart; our hearts give us no rest for thinking of the Land of Burning Children. And for thinking of that other Child, of whom the poet Luke speaks. The infant was taken up in the arms of an old man, whose tongue grew resonant and vatic at the touch of that beauty. And the old man spoke: this child is set for the fall and rise of many in Israel, a sign that is spoken against.Small consolation; a child born to make trouble, and to die for it, the First Jew (not the last) to be subject of a “definitive solution.” He sets up the cross and dies on it; in the Rose Garden of the executive mansion, on the D.C. Mall, in the courtyard of the Pentagon. We see the sign, we read the direction: you must bear with us, for his sake. Or if you will not, the consequences are our own."

"We are no more, when the truth is told, than ignorant beset men, jockeying against all chance, at the hour of death, for a place at the right hand of the dying one."

"Finally, we stretch out our hands to our brothers throughout the world. We who are priests, to our fellow priests. All of us who act against the law turn to the poor of the world, to the Vietnamese, to the victims, to the soldiers who kill and die, for the wrong reasons, for no reason at all, because they were so ordered—by the authorities of that public order which is in effect a massive institutionalized disorder.

We say: killing is disorder, life and gentleness and community and unselfishness is the only order we recognize. For the sake of that order, we risk our liberty, our good name. The time is past when good men can remain silent, when obedience can segregate men from public risk, when the poor can die without defense.

We ask our fellow Christians to consider in their hearts a question which has tortured us, night and day, since the war began. How many must die before our voices are heard, how many must be tortured, dislocated, starved, maddened? How long must the world’s resources be raped in the service of legalized murder? When, at what point, will you say no to this war?

We have chosen to say, with the gift of our liberty, if necessary our lives: the violence stops here, the death stops here, the suppression of the truth stops here, this war stops here.We wish also to place in question, by this act, all suppositions about normal times, about longings for an untroubled life in a somnolent church, about a neat timetable of ecclesiastical renewal which, in respect to the needs of men, amounts to another form of time-serving."

"Redeem the times! The times are inexpressibly evil. Christians pay conscious, indeed religious tribute, to Caesar and Mars: by the approval of overkill tactics, by brinkmanship, by nuclear liturgies, by racism, by support of genocide. They embrace their society with all their heart, and abandon the cross. They pay lip service to Christ and military service to the powers of death.

And yet, and yet, the times are inexhaustibly good, solaced by the courage and hope of many. The truth rules; Christ is not forsaken. In a time of death, some men—the resisters, those who work hardily for social change, those who preach and embrace the unpalatable truth—such men overcome death, their lives are bathed in the light of the resurrection, the truth has set them free. In the jaws of death, of contumely, of good and ill report, they proclaim their love of the brethren.

We think of such men, in the world, in our nation, in the churches; and the stone in our breast is dissolved; we take heart once more."

If we Listen Well, Ed Guinan

2007-03-22T19:03:00.000-04:00

Bio: Edward Guinan is a Paulist priest and founder of the Community for Creative Nonviolence in Washington, D.C.

Quotations:

"Finally one comes to appreciate the reality that there can be no “we’s” and “they’s” in our lives, but only brothers and sisters—all children of God—all sacred and dignified. Destruction of any one of these God-gifts means a certain destruction of oneself, and a mystery that is gone forever from this small, fragile world."

"Violence can be seen as destructive communication. Any adequate definition must include physical, verbal, symbolic, psychological and spiritual displays of hostility and hatred. The definition must include both our acts and our inactions and that which is done directly to people or indirectly to them through what they esteem. Many forms will take on a combination of these characteristics.

Violence should then include physical acts against another (i.e., the range of acts from personal attack to war, that which violates human autonomy and integrity); verbal attacks that demean and humiliate; symbolic acts that evoke fear and hostility; psychological attitudes that deny one’s humanity and equality (legal, institutional and moral); spiritual postures that communicate racism, inferiority and worthlessness (i.e., beliefs and values that demean or categorize). Violence then becomes a dynamic rather than merely an act.

Hunger, poverty, squalor, privilege, powerlessness, riches, despair, and vicarious living are forms of violence—forms that a society approves and perpetuates. We have been too willing to discuss violence in terms of ghetto uprisings, student unrest, street thievery and trashing, and have been unwilling to direct our attention to the more pathological types of violence that are acceptable—the types that daily crush the humanity and life from untold millions of brothers and sisters."

"The other type of violence is the violence of the respect able, the violence of the powerful that seeks personal gain and privilege by maintaining inhuman conditions. It is the violence of the board rooms, legislators and jurists—the white collar violence that pours surplus milk down sewers, robs workers of their wages, maintains prisons of infamy, lies to children, discards the weak and old and insists that some should half-live while others rape and ravage the earth. This latter type of violence is what we must become aware of and actively dismantle if the future is to hold any possibilities for peace and a world where all men and women have a right to live and develop and participate by reason of their humanity, not by reason of their class, productive ability or shrewdness."

"Non-violence cannot then be understood as passivity or indifference to the dynamic of life (i.e., communication between men). It is not the posture of removing oneself from conflict that marks the true non-violent man, but, quite on the contrary, it is placing oneself at the heart of that [conflict] dynamic. Non-violence means taking the responsibility for aiding the direction of human communication and brotherhood. Non-violence means an active opposition to those acts and attitudes that demean and brutalize another, and it means an active support of those values and expressions that foster human solidarity. Non-violence, in essence, means taking a stand in favor of life and refusing to delegate individual moral responsibility to another person or group; it means taking control of one’s life and aiding others in doing likewise. Non-violence is an attempt to find truth and love even in the midst of hatred, destruction and pride.

As the means cannot be separated from the desired ends, nonviolence cannot be separated from peace, for it is the value system and dynamic that makes peace possible."

"These are not good times, but good times do not mold great people. The sins of our excesses and arrogance can destroy us, or these failings can humble us to sainthood. Such are the times.If the great virtues and teachings of the martyrs, resisters and saints are relegated to a Utopian or future-oriented condition, then, indeed, they have little value for us at all. But the great heritage that this “community of liberation” has left us is not some unreal, impossible dream. It is this: Love can, and must, be lived today, despite the pain and difficulty of such life.

Tomorrow will carry the tenderness and peace which we live now. Do not compromise today. It is all, dear brothers and sisters, that we have."

"The editor of this volume finds it unnecessary to argue their case, but merely requests that you read thoughtfully; you may discover that there is a difference between rhetoric and prayer. The former may well impress you, but only the latter will bring you salvation."

"Yet in the aloneness and struggle, in the departures and questions, in the cries and songs, in the dance and prayers there are imprints of heroic men and women, there are weavings of beauty, there are caresses of God."

Kristof, Power, Fowler... exploit student Inactivists and Darfur

2007-01-12T20:18:00.000-05:00

[originally posted 4/12/07]

"Example is not the main thing in influencing others. It is the only thing." Albert Schweitzer (from Eva Fogelman's, "Conscience & Courage: Rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust.")

OPEN LETTER TO KRISTOF, POWER AND FOWLER (RESPONSE TO "COMMENTS" INVITED - WILL BE DISPLAYED).

[SEE: A Hunger For Justice : Darfur Becomes One Man's Cause for Deprivation Delphine Schrank, C01 (Post) Washington Post, April 14, 2007]

Dear Samantha, Nicholas, and Jerry,

Glance around this site - Peace and Nonviolence - The Berrigans, Gandhi, King, Hanh, Wm. Lloyd Garrison.... Remind yourselves of what responsible people that saw truth as you have have done with their lives, not just their pens or mouths. For more examples see excerpts from "Conscience & Courage: Rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust."

When have three people done so much good and been responsible for so much atrocity? Why am I targeting you? You still are in a position to more good than anyone for Darfur; and you are still in a position to do much more murder. Why target you? With great knowledge comes great responsibility.

It is not enough you put the word out. In doing so you took on the mantel of Darfur Rescue Leader, and you cannot remove it - impossible.

Here is it in a nutshell. Let's say I am Dr. Joseph Lister and in the 2nd half of the 1800's I discover that bacterium on scalpels is killing huge number of patients. GREAT! He writes a paper and gets it in the newspaper! GREAT! Now Dr. Lister goes on about his normal routine, no one get's it, and Dr. Lister does not bother sterilizing his tools. Murder right? In fact, Lister darn near killed himself for 20 years to get the word out. He saved a lot of lives. Success is 1% inspiration 99% perspiration.

Samantha, you of all people discovered what it takes to stop genocide - YOU have the greatest knowledge and hence the greatest responsibility to ACT. You discovered that stopping genocide takes people laying down their lives - in great number!!! One Lemkin is not enough! 100 Lemkins may be!!!! You saw this Samantha and you cannot escape the moral responsibility that places on you. Your behavior is the "evidence" the world relies on. Your behavior says "Darfur is not that bad... surely not worth laying down MY life for!"

Nicholas, your words totally redirected my life starting three years ago. But most people have less imagination than I. With what you know personally, that you are living normally in the face of genocide - speaks much louder than your Columns. Nick Kristof's behavior says, "Nothing worth laying down MY life for is going on."

Jerry, either you don't believe Genocide is worth laying down one's life for, OR you don't believe Darfur Genocide is laying down your life for.

If the three of you don't start laying down your lives, it is game over Darfur. If you do start laying down your lives - chain yourselves to the UN doors, sit at the White House gate demanding a meeting with Bush, blockade the Chinese embassy... you will do justice to your earlier words and stop Genocide for the first time.

Samantha, your book was so right on. Your ending was perfect: "George Bernard Shaw once wrote, "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." After a century of doing so little to prevent, suppress, and punish genocide, Americans must join and thereby legitimate the ranks of the unreasonable." BUT YOU THREE HAVE VIOLATED EVERYTHING - YOU'VE BEEN AND ENCOURAGED OTHERS TO BE PERFECTLY REASONABLE. ENOUGH!

If you do less than lay down your lives you've done nothing more than exploit Darfur for your personal advantage - that is the physics of it. And for God's sake quit filling these student InActivist's heads that they have done other than abandon Darfur and exploit it for some self-pleasuring themselves. You are in the company of Gandhi, King, the Berrigans and above all real Holocaust Rescuers. Watch yourselves.

Start Loving

[WE HAVE UNTIL JUNE 30, CONTROL OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL, TO RESCUE & RESTORE DARFUR. JOIN A BRIGADE OF PEACEMAKERS, NOW, OR IT IS TOO LATE.]

See updates at all sites:

DARFUR'S LAST HOPE: Brigade of PeaceMakers: for Darfur. JOIN NOW
SAVING DARFUR, EARTH, OURSELVES: Jesus, God, Good...
REAL ACTIVISM LOOKS LIKE THIS: Holocaust Rescuers
REAL ACTIVISM LOOKS LIKE THIS: Peace and Nonviolence
REAL ACTIVISM LOOKS LIKE THIS: David Dellinger
4 DARFUR HEROES; 21,000 FOR HOLOCAUST: Darfur Dying for Heroes
HUNGER STRIKE: Stand with Darfur: Sudan Embassy
WE'RE PROOF OF NO GENOCIDE: Darfur Genocide a Fraud
Actions 6/06 - 1/07: Stand With Darfur White House II
Actions 5/06 - 6/06: Stand With Darfur White House
Actions 7/05 - 5/06: Rescue Restore Darfur