Jesus, Pacifism, and Resistance - II
Part Three
What does all of this mean, however, for 21st century Christians. How do we read and interpret scripture in manner that teaches and inspires us to carry out God’s radical command to love our enemies, and be transformed. We must aggressively respond in a loving manner to injustice, whether it comes from and individual, our local or spiritual communities, or the state.
Often, the question of whether or not the authority of the nation-state includes the authority to, in denial of Jesus example of nonviolence, send Christians into war. More often than not, the text of Romans 13:1-7 is used as a proof-text for ordering Christian submission to the state, especially, some argue, because of verse 13:4b “…for it does not bear the sword for nothing, for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.”
Oscar Cullman recognizes three question raised of the state and its authority. We see from the gospel accounts of Jesus’ teaching that:
1) Jesus does not regard the state as the final institution to be equated somehow with the kingdom of God… accordingly, disciples have both the right and duty to judge the state on the basis of their knowledge of the kingdom of God. 2) Jesus agrees with Zealotism as far as it takes seriously the expectation of the kingdom of God, and thus does not regard the state as the ultimate, divine institution. 3) In the case of Jesus’ condemnation… the Roman state transgresse(s) its limits as a state.
“Waging war,” says Cullman, “may be a matter for the state, but not for the community of disciples.” This view of the Gospels may appear in conflict with the Romans 13 text, as do other New Testament texts. It is not possible to discuss the Romans passage without referring also to 1 Corinthians 6:1ff. “Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to the law before the unrighteous and not before the saints, or do you not know the saints will judge the world.. So if you have law courts dealing with the matters of this life, so you appoint them as judges who are of no account to the church?”
This text obviously points to a lack of trust in the state’s ability to discern the righteous will of God, and declares that believers will sit in the seat of authority at judgment. We should also view 1 Corinthians 2:8: “The wisdom which none of the rulers of this state has understood; for if they have understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.”
While Paul admits the state has the right to raise the sword and Christians are subject to that authority, he does not say Christians should indiscriminately obey government. While it is certainly true that governments exact God’s wrath on evil, it is also true that the state judges indiscriminately, and often meets evil with evil of its own, a thing Paul exhorts Christians not to do in Romans 12:17.
In fact, according to James D.G. Dunn, it is no accident that Romans 13:1-7 is “bracketed” by twin exhortations to love (12:9 and 13:8-10). The later not only reaffirms and draws upon the richness of the law as a guide for ethical conduct, but indicates how the law is to be interpreted through love of neighbor as the primary principle.
Considering all of this, it seems wise to take another look at interpreting Romans 13:1ff when others use it to call Christians to the war effort. Let us put the passage into its proper context and see what Paul was really saying.
Dunn writes that the “little churches of Rome” were living under a constant state of threat. We also know from contemporary sources that during the time the letter to the Romans was written, the heavy burdens of indirect taxation were causing unrest in Rome at the time.
“Failure of a number of Christians to pay even an inflated tax,” writes Dunn, “would have drawn attention to the little congregations and put them at risk.” As readers of Paul’s letter found themselves in the very capital of the empire - it was precisely among these Christians that it was possible for feelings of animosity toward the state to arise.
Finally, the Roman authorities had a well-developed system of informants and spies, and this was well known to Paul. Dunn writes “We should allow for the possibility that at least some of Paul’s exhortation was framed with the thought in mind that ‘walls have ears’.”
In summary, using Roman’s 13:1-7 as a proof-text to legitimize Christian support of state sponsored violence fails when compared to Jesus’ gospel views of the state, Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, and the proper context of the passage. Read in proper context, Paul was advocating for the churches in Rome to take a realistic, safe, and politically quiet response to Roman authority. According to Dunn, Paul exhibited the “realism of the…powerless.”
With this in mind, we can also reach the conclusion that Romans 13:1-7 does not rule out Christian protests against unjust state policies or laws. It does mean that Christians are subject to those laws. Violence is ruled out as a means of bringing about policy change, and if the state’s laws are broken, the Christian is bound to pay the legal price, if ordered to do so by the law courts. Of course, at the heart of every Christian action, even in civil disobedience, should be love, and the hope that love, prayer, and peaceful action will address unjust situations.
Now that we have established an ethic that relates us to a moral, and spiritual, way of living established by Jesus, we need to consider what this means for us as a church, and our relationship with the world around us. We can call this the kingdom ethic.
Many of our Christian brothers and sisters argue that the kingdom has yet to be established, or has been established only in a spiritual, or otherworldly, or inwardly sense only. As Bruce Chilton states, “It is not that the kingdom is one day to be immanent; it is rather that the kingdom is already immanent and is one day to be comprehensive.” I discussed above, on page six, that Jesus ushered in the kingdom of God. I also noted that an alternative term for kingdom offered by some scholars is “reign” or “rule of God.” In this last part of the book, I wish to discuss the “kingdom of God” in the sense that it is our current reality, and that Jesus welcomed the kingdom of God as being realized through His work, His crucifixion, and of course, His resurrection.
Ron Sider writes “If anything is clear in Jesus, it is that the announcement and demonstration of the kingdom are at the core of (H)is message.” As Jesus stood in the synagogue in His hometown and read from Isaiah 61:1-2a the event clearly announced the arrival of the messianic kingdom. John Yoder states that this kingdom “is a visible, socio-political, economic restructuring of relations among the people of God, achieved by His intervention in the person of Jesus.” If this is how the inauguration of the kingdom was viewed, how much more should these restructured relationships be evident in the Body of Christ in the present day? We are called as the representatives of the kingdom of God to overcome unjust socio-political and economic relationships in the name and image of Jesus Christ.
Jesus, the anointed, bringing the good news, liberation and freedom to the humble and oppressed, not only of Israel, but human kind. The term “good news” is in itself a loaded political term that was well recognized throughout the Roman empire, and would have carried a double meaning to many first century listeners. They would have taken the “good news” to be a direct challenge to Caesar’s empire as well as a reference to the Hebrew Scripture.
Sider writes that this kingdom of God language was a direct challenge to the status quo of Roman imperialism and Jewish aristocracy. Jesus’ gospel demanded a “sweeping change” in relationships between rich and poor, men and women, the clean and unclean, and, indeed, Israel and God.
One of the meanings of the kingdom of God is found in Torah as well as Israel’s prophetic writings. If we view Israel’s vocation as being witness to the kingdom of God as found in Exodus 19:6; “You will be a nation of priests and a holy nation,” we get a better idea of how Jesus viewed the kingdom as a present reality inaugurated by His ministry. Jesus was calling for Israel - responding to God’s acting in history - to return to its vocation as a visible demonstration of God’s will for creation. Jesus, taking His cue from Jeremiah 31:31-34, is declaring that the establishment of a renewed, right relationship - a new covenant with YHWH - is at the center of the kingdom.”
As we have shown throughout this book, nonviolence is at the center of this new covenant, and along with grace and forgiveness, is to be the identifying marker of God’s present kingdom.
“The kingdom of God,” writes Yoder, “is a social order and not a hidden one. It is not a universal catastrophe independent of men, it is that concrete, jubilary obedience, in pardon and repentance…it reveals why it is that history should go on.”
The “universal catastrophe” Yoder writes about speaks more toward fundamentalist views that hold toward the kingdom of God being brought to fullness by an apocalyptic or end-time event. While viewing Jesus’ kingdom announcement as an eschatological event, we should not reason that this eschatology refers to or promises an end to the space-time continuum.
Instead, Jesus is referring eschatologically to an event - earth shattering as it is - in which God acts decisively to establish His reign on Earth during the course of history. Jesus’ life, and ministry, and His resurrection make up that event. Other apocalyptic language used by Jesus refers to the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in 66 C.E.
Through this event a community of believers should define their relationship with God, and His creation, as one of change and growth. Jesus’ messianic announcement was by no means unique. Others had made the same announcement and, like Jesus, did not live long afterward. Any announcement that the King of the Jews had arrived was bound to raise the ire of client kings, and naturally, Caesar. The unique aspect of Jesus’ ministry was that His kingdom announcement did not at all entail what first century Jews imagined it would. According to Jesus, there was an enemy to be confronted, but that enemy was not necessarily the Roman empire. Jesus established the kingdom to challenge evil of another kind, Israel’s own vision of its relationship to God. Wright states:
…Jesus spent (H)is whole ministry redefining what kingdom meant. He refused to give up the new symbolic language of the kingdom, but filled it with such new content that…(H)e powerfully subverted Jewish expectation.
…the fact that the full revelation or dawning of the kingdom remains in the future does not negate…but rather demands, that something be acknowledged as present, such as the messiahship of Jesus.
And, the ethic of Jesus’ kingdom must be acknowledged as well. It is this ethic that I have established with this book. An ethic of redeeming love, forgiveness and grace, coupled with a desire to see the will of God and justice promoted and demanded in a self-sacrificing and nonviolent manner. God commands that we strive to overcome injustice, and we find it in so many places throughout creation. We find it in poverty, racism, and sexism. We find it in a culture of violence and militarism. We find it in our own communities and family relationships. Sometimes, we find it in our own voices. More often than not, we as a people sacrifice justice instead of our own desires or material wants.
God commands that we love Him, and our neighbor, if nothing else, and Jesus establishes that everyone is our neighbor, especially in our 21st century global village. As we strive to meet these commands, often falling short, we can take heart that we are playing a role in God’s restoration of creation, and reflecting His will as a visible kingdom community. We offer the kingdom to others, not to get a reward in some heavenly netherworld, but to bring peace and justice in our struggle for orthodoxy in our relationship with the Creator. We then reap the benefits with the rest of creation as the result of the restoration of God’s good and perfect world, which Jesus Christ has redeemed.
Bibliography
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich The Cost of Discipleship
New York, 1963; The Macmillan Company
Brown, Dale Biblical Pacifism: A Peace Church Perspective
Elgin, Il, 1986; Brethren Press
Cahill, Lisa Sowle Love Your Enemies: Discipleship, Pacifism, and Just War Theory Minneapolis, 1994; Fortress Press
Childress, James F. Just War Theories: The Base Relations, Priorities, and Functions of their Criteria Theological Studies 39.03 Summer 1978 p. 427-445
Cook, Martin L. Moral Challenges
The Christian Century 118.31 Nov. 14, 2001 p.22-23
Cullman, Oscar The State and the New Testament
New York, 1956; Charles Scribner’s Sons
Davies, W.D. The Sermon on the Mount
Cambridge, U.K., 1966; Cambridge University Press
Driver, John How Christians Made Peace With War
Scottdale, PA, 1988; Herald Press
Dunn, James D.G. The Theology of the Apostle Paul
Grand Rapids, MI, William B. Eerdmans
Elshtain, Jean Bethke Seeking Justice
The Christian Century 118.31 Nov. 14, 2001 p.26-27
Hehir, Brian J. Just War Theory in a Post-Cold War World
Journal of Religious Ethics 20.02 Fall 1992 p. 237-277
Horsley, Richard A. Jesus and the Spiral of Violence: Popular Resistance in the Roman State San Francisco, 1987; Harper and Row
Horsley, Richard A. and Hanson, John S. Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs: Popular Movements at the Time of Jesus San Francisco, 1985; Harper and Row
Josephus, Flavius, translated by William Whiston, Peabody, MA, 1987; Hendrickson Publishers
Lamoreaux, John and Beebe, Ralph Waging Peace: A Study in Biblical Pacifism Newberg, OR, 1981; The Barclay Press
Mattison, Mark Jesus: Nonviolent Revolutionary www.concentric.net/~Mattison/Jesus
---The Jesus Revolution: A Socio-Political Reading of the Gospel 2000,
www.concentric.net/~Mattison/Jesus
---The Subversive Parables of Jesus 2001,
www.concentric.net/~Mattison/Jesus
Richardson, Alan The Political Christ
Philadelphia, 1973; Westminster Press
Sider, Ronald J. Christ and Violence
Scottdale, PA, 1979; Herald Press
---Good News and Good Works: A Theology for the Whole Gospel
Grand Rapids, MI, 1999; William B. Eerdmans
Wengst, Klaus Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ
Philadelphia, 1987; Fortress Press
Wink, Walter The Powers That Be: A Theology for a New Millennium
New York, 1988; Doubleday
Wright, N.T. Jesus and the Victory of God
Minneapolis, 1996; Fortress Press
Yoder, John H. The Politics of Jesus: Vicit Agnus Noster
Grand Rapids, MI, 1972; William B. Eerdmans
|
