West Yellowstone, Montana

Thoughts About Peace and Pacifism (Part One)

I am a pacifist, and have been one for much of my life. A pacifist for me is someone who will not use violence against other people for any reason. There are those who would define the term more broadly and include violence against other animal species. They may have a legitimate point, but I'm not exactly at that place in my life, and for the purposes of this series of entries I will limit the definition to violence against humans. However violence against humans can be included in acts that threaten human health and life, such as destroying vegetation and crops by spraying Agent Orange as was done during the Vietnam War, or the use of depleted uranium in Iraq and elsewhere which will be causing potentially fatal tumors in children for millions of years. Those actions are just as wrong as killing people,

My pacifism is based in my Christian beliefs. I grew up in the Mennonite Church in Lancaster Co., Pennsylvania, one of the increasing number of places in the world with a high concentration of Mennonites. I was taught from my earliest memories that it's wrong for me as a Christian to participate in warfare, to get in fights with other people, or to try to get even with someone who wronged me. I repeatedly heard the stories of Dirk Willems, the early Mennonite, or Anabaptist as we were called then, who gave up his life to rescue an enemy from drowning in a frozen Dutch river, or the story of two brothers, members of the Hutterites, who were tortured to death in a military prison in Kansas because they refused to put on the uniform and participate in World War 1. I am currently a charter member of and on the leadership team at Hyde Park Mennonite Fellowship in Boise, Idaho, although the thoughts and beliefs I present in this series and anywhere on this blog are my own. I'm not writing or speaking for anyone else.

I graduated from Lancaster Mennonite High School in 1966, during the Vietnam War. Although many young men were being drafted and sent to Vietnam, I not only was not drafted, I didn't even know anyone who was drafted, or who joined the military. All of my friends and nearly all of my acquaintances were Mennonite pacifists like myself. Some would say that I was sheltered and out of touch with the reality of the world where wars rage and people suffer immensely, but who would argue that being sheltered from the violence of warfare is a bad thing? There was no chance I would have participated in the military, if drafted. Becoming a soldier was unthinkable. There was no way that I could have disgraced my family and shamed my parents and grandparents more than by joining the military and participating in warfare.

As Mennonites our pacifism, (or, as some would prefer, non-resistance), is based on solid historical and Biblical foundations. Roland Baintan in his book "Christian Attitudes Toward War and Peace" writes that for the first three centuries of Christianity, all Christians were pacifists. Soldiers were not allowed to be church members. The Christians who lived closest to the time of Christ believed that pacifism was mandatory for Christians. The treatment of enemies by Jesus and his twelve apostles was strongly pacifist. None of them were allowd to use violence to defend themselves from their enemies, and when Peter tried to protect Jesus by using the sword, Jesus rebuked him.


The number of Biblical and other reasons for being a pacifist are almost endless. In this series I will be presenting what I see as reasons to reject participation in warfare or any kind of retaliatory violence against humans. However I want to emphasize that being a pacifist does not mean that one is passive. On the contrary. The two words, pacifist and passive are more likely to be antonyms than synonyms. A passive person is one who is nonchalant, apathetic, one who doesn't care. In order to be a pacifist one has to care deeply. For a Christian pacifist, that caring will include enemies, including enemy nations. During the two most recent wars we've all seen the messages on bumper stickers, on magnetic signs, and even on some Christian church signs. Many of them include the phrase, "God Bless Our Troops," which is a profoundly anti-Christian way of directing our requests for blessings. The Christian approach, which has been used in prayer at our church many times, is to request God's blessing for all the troops. Taliban troops and Iraqi insurgents are also created in the image of God. Like us, they are people Jesus came and died for, precisely so they would not have to die for their sins.

You might argue, perhaps with some justification, that the Taliban and Iraqi Insurgents are evil, oppressive people, with no respect for human life. Others would claim, perhaps with equal justification, that they are just protecting their homelands from a vicious foreign invader and occupier. I've noticed that one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter, that one person's war lord or insurgent is another's liberator. Any person or country who uses violence for whatever reason is destroying freedom. Killing people destroys freedom. A dead person has no freedom of speech, press, or religion, no choices on election day, and no democracy. We may claim that sometimes it's necessary to use deadly force against those who might take away our freedoms, but in doing so we are also guilty of destroying freedom. And in all of these violent military conflicts, those most likely to be killed or injured are always the innocent, that is women and children. From 75 to 90% of all the victims of wars since World War 2 have been innocent civilians, and that is as true for victims of US military actions as for the military actions of any other country.

Leonard Nolt

Today while sitting in the back seat of the car as I slowly drove north on 13th st. past Camelsback Park, Zach said, "I hope sometime they'll be no war. I don't want any war in Boise while I live here."

Summer in the City

Summer in the City

Summer in the City

Summer in the City

"Extreme" Truth

I saw this sign on a church in Boise a few weeks ago. It raises some questions that are difficult to answer. For example: How does extreme truth differ from simply "truth?" Is it a less common truth, or a less obvious one? Where does one go to find the "extreme truth" assuming it's not at the same location as the "truth?" I suppose I could have attended a service there to find out what the extreme truth is, but I didn't, although I admit it was mildly tempting. However I'm afraid I might be disappointed. Some more questions arise, like which direction does one go to find the extreme truth, right or left, up or down, or somewhere else? Should I assume that this extreme truth might be controversial, that it might not be easily accepted as the truth? Do I really need the extreme truth or am I just as well off with the simple truth? In writing classes I've been reminded mumerous times that good writing is made up of strong nouns and verbs, that adjectives often weaken or obscure communication. I think this may be a good example of an adjective undermining quailty communication.

Images of Friends and Family

Images of Friends and Family

Images of Friends and Family

Images of Friends and Family

"If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reaction, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that's what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." -- John F. Kennedy, 1960.

A "Money" Idea

"Or it could involve looking at someone like Benard Lietaer, the Belgian currency specialist who was one of the architects of the Euro. He suggested that you could have a global trading currency that would actually have a negative interest or a demurrage charge, so that the longer you held on to it, the more value it would lose. Then, instead of wanting to hoard it, you would want to share it and get it back into circulation, which might lead to more community-based values." (From an article about Daniel Pinchbeck, by Stephen Mooallem in the June-July, 2009 issue of Interview Magazine, page 118).

One possible response to this idea is the question - "Isn't this what we already have, currency that loses its value? For most of my lifetime the gradual trend is one in which it takes more and more money to obtain something of value. A new car could be purchsed in the 1960s for a couple thousand dollars. Now a new car is likly to cost ten times more. Housing costs at least ten times more than what it did fifty years ago. I understand that if money loses its value one would trade it for something that might not lose value, which is why many have invested in land or real estate in the past, only to find out that that, too can lose some of its value. If sharing it and getting it back into circulation leads to more community-based values, shouldn't there be many examples in recent history? I'd like to hear more about this idea, but so far I'm not quite convinced.

What is our "Wellbeing Index?"

This is an interesting and short article about the "wellbeing" of our country and its citizens. www.workplacebullying.org/2009/07/13/ciw/

Canada is doing some interesting things to measure the wellbeing of its citizens. It's clear that one reason US citizens suffer is because of our excessive investment in and committment to using military violence against other countries as a means of trying to solve our differences.

Mennonite Church USA National Convention - 2009, Columbus, Ohio

Mennonite Church USA National Convention - 2009, Columbus, Ohio

This is nice short story from "Every Day Fiction." www.everydayfiction.com/choice-snow-by-diane-hoover-bechtler/

"Our greatest weariness comes from work not done."

Eric Hoffer

"....but you've got to have some fun in life."

Zach Branam

Celebrating as a Christian (Thinking about Pentecost and the Fourth of July)

Celebrations are a part of our Christian and national traditions. As Christians we celebrate the birth, death, and resurrection of Christ and as citizens we celebrate the birth of our nation.

Sometimes it is beneficial to compare a Christian celebration with a secular one, looking for similarities and differences, as a way of keeping our celebrations biblical. It's especially interesting to compare Pentecost, the founding of the church with the Fourth of July, the founding of the United States. Both remind us of freedom. The Fourth of July reminds us of the freedom people have as citizens of a country. Pentecost reminds us of our experience in being freed from the tyranny of sin.

Both celebrations look to the future. There's an abundance of hope and promise in the empowering by the Holy Spirit which began at Pentecost. Likewise, as a nation there would be little or nothing to celebrate today if we thought that all our freedoms were going to disappear tomorrow.

However there are some significant differences in the two events. The celebration at Pentecost is associated with joy, life, and faith in God. The celebration that happens on the Fourth of July in the United States is aligned with many symbols of militarism and should remind us that our existence as a nation was acquired with much suffering, especially to the native Americans and slaves who lived in the early history of our country.

Pentecost was a unifying experience. Acts 4:32 says, "The group of believers was one in mind and heart." The events leading to the first Fourth of July celebration had a divisive effect. During the Revolutionary War two-thirds of the citizens in the colonies were either still loyal to the British government or wanted to remain neutral.

The Pentecost experience was a a celebration of the presence of the Holy Spirit. It was a celebration which proclaimed, "God with us!" The Fourth of July celebration is a celebration, not of the presence of God, but of the presence of the most powerful weapons of war. On this national birthday many Americans celebrate their trust in the bomb.

Pentecost celebrates the truth. The early church celebrated because they discovered that God's promises are true. The Messiah had come. He was resurrected, and had sent the Holy Spirit like he promised. They witnessed out of having experienced the presence of that truth in their lives. The Fourth of July celebration of independence, an independence acquired and maintained by trust in war and violence, is something that we can only celebrate because we haven't experienced it. It is, literally, celebrating a lie.

To explain further, there are many people living in Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Latin America who have survived under the shadow of war for decades. Many have been injured, lost relatives and friends, and lost property to the violence of war. These people have experienced war firsthand in their neighborhoods and hometowns. They know war is nothing to celebrate but a nightmare to dread.

There hasn't been a war on US soil for over a century, so most Americans have little or no firsthand knowledge of war. Even most US soldiers who fought overseas in the past several decades have not been faced with the horror of seeing their homes and families destroyed by war. War is not the glorious, exalting experience that many pretend it is every Fourth of July. The Fourth of July celebration is a false celebration.

The Pentecost experience was a result of the Holy Spirit entering people's lives and making them whole and complete persons in a way never experienced before. The Fourth of July, celebrates, not the wholeness of people, but acts of war which destroy human wholeness, physically, mentally, and spiritually.

Pentecost took care of all human needs. Acts 4:34 says, "There was no one in the group who was in need." All wars, including the wars celebrated by Americans on July 4th increase human suffering and need. War causes poverty, famine, physical handicaps, and death. War is the biggest threat families have ever faced. War destroys neighborhoods, alienates people, and breaks down productive societies. War has been responsible for turning millions of people into refugees.

The Pentecost experience had a liberating effect on those who were filled with the Holy Spirit, a liberation that was and is for all people everywhere. Although words like freedom, liberty, and Independence are associated with the Fourth of July celebration, it is in fact, a celebration of the denial of freedom. The phrase, "war of liberation" is a contradiction. War only transfers oppression from one victim to another. American militarism, as presented by exhibits of military equipment in our parades, tells us that our freedom and liberty is based on our willingness to destroy the freedom and liberty of enemies by killing them.

The closer we look at the celebrations of Pentecost and the Fourth of July, the more incompatible they seem. Dale Aukerman in his book Darkening Valley: A Biblical Perspective on Nuclear War, writes, "The two utterly contrary attitudes we can take toward those with whom we are in contact are blessing and cursing. In blessing we as that the mercy of God and the goodness of life rest upon others. In cursing we seek to exclude them from that..." To curse someone or some nation is to call down doom or misfortune on them. If we identify with the Fourth of July celebration and its militaristic and nationalistic symbols, then we are part of the cursing or calling down of doom on those who are our nation's enemies, and in so doing we seek to deprive them of the fullness of God's blessing. Ecclesiastes 21:27 says, "When a godless man curses his enemy, he is cursing himself." When we stoop to the level of cursing others. whether they be personal enemies or national enemies, we become our own worst enemy. We cannot escape the doom ourselves without God's forgiveness and we can't receive that forgiveness unless we are willing to forgive others (Matthew 6:12, 14, 15).

If we look closely at the Fourth of July celebrations we can recognize within them, not only the echoes of past wars, but also the rumblings for future ones. John Howard Yoder writes, "The idolatry of patriotism, believing that any one nation's or people's cause is so worthy that to it human lives - whether of 'friend' or 'foe' - should be sacrificed, must be unveiled not first when it has actually led to open warfare, but already when the possibility of such slaughter has been accepted in government plans. "

"Not the taking of life, but the idolizing of one's own interest which leads finally to killing is the deepest sin of militarism. Whether the sixth commandment absolutely forbids all killing is still debated; in any case the first forbids nationalism."

James 3:8-10 says, "But no one has ever been able to tame the tongue. It is evil and uncontrollable, full of deadly poison. We use it to give thanks to our Lord and Father and also to curse our fellow-man, who is created in the likeness of God. Words of thanksgiving and cursing pour out from the same mouth. My brothers, this should not happen!"

There is a place to be properly thankful for the privileges and opportunities we have living in our own country. But many Christians will, in their celebration of the Fourth of July, go beyond words of thanksgiving to words of cursing or calling down doom on those who might jeopardize that which we consider ours. The tongue is guilty of cursing when it cheers and applauds military exhibits in Fourth of July parades and it is also guilty of cursing when it is silent in the presence of doom or misfortune befalling our nation's enemies.

The biblical person cannot include in his celebration, attitudes, actions, or language that are threatening to the well-being of others. The tongues given by the Holy Spirit to believers on Pentecost did not include any cursing or calling down misfortune on enemies. So we need to remember that we are first and foremost witnesses of the Pentecost experience. That is our primary source of celebration.

Leonard Nolt

Previously published in slightly different form in the June 21, 1983 issue of GOSPEL HERALD.