|
of wanting withdrawal from the turbulent world stage. Given this reaction then, please read the opinions these two theologians offer to us. First we receive a pacifistic argument from H. Richard Niebuhr… "The inactivity of radical Christianity is not the inactivity of those who call evil good; it is the inaction of those who do not judge their neighbors because they cannot fool themselves into a sense of superior righteousness. It is not the inactivity of the noncombatant, for it knows that there are no noncombatants, that everyone is involved, that China is being crucified by our sins and those of the whole world. It is not the inactivity of the merciless, for works of mercy must be performed even though they are only palliates to ease present pain while the process of healing |
|
depends on deeper, more actual and urgent forces." (H. Richard Niebuhr of Yale University)
With observational reading, I first reacted to the historical classification of this statement as expressing the mindset of “radical peace”. However, in today’s world a pacifistic theological outlook is not so radical, nor too difficult to find. Indeed my memory recalls that within the liberal, socialist theologies that emerged in the ‘60s, this tendency toward pacifism found its way deep into the life of both Church and state. This occurred as we wrestled with such things as the Viet Nam conflict and our domestic answers to racism. Pacifist activities were promoted by many religious figures, Respected and beloved persons such as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. protested. As this unfolded, Far Eastern pacifist philosophies entered western society from such as Hinduism and |
|
Click on the picture to view our online Christian videos! |
|
Steer Toward Kingdom Fulfillment |
|
Just War... |