When George Fox and others began the Quaker experiment, they were attempting to re-capture the primitive Christian experience. Part of that early experience was pacifism. Most historians accept that for the first 300 years after the crucifixion membership in the Jesus movement and military service were incompatible. They were simply unfit for military service. It was not until Constantine rolled Christianity into the state that warfare and Christianity became compatible. From those early days until today, Christianity and warfare have been very happily married. The Quaker peace testimony can neither be understood without that ancient Christian context. I could make this talk a simple presentation of the scriptural foundation for the impossibility of a follower of Jesus supporting or participating in violence and warfare. The entirety of Matthew 5 is sufficient for me, from “blessed are the peace makers for they shall be called the children of God” to “love your enemies and pray for your persecutors” and of course, “Turn the other cheek.” Radical then, radical now. However, the literalist scriptural approach would open the door to… …well, a literalist scriptural approach, to which, I do not subscribe. In fact that approach seems to me to run counter to what the Rabbi Jesus taught. Scriptural literalism is a modern phenomenon and one that profoundly diminishes the power of scripture! The words of scripture are subject to interpretation and sometimes, outright rejection. Frankly, that whole stoning thing troubles me. For me there is only one True Authority, whose leadings certainly inspired many Bible writings as well as many other writings and sayings by people of all faiths throughout history. Those same writings are also often abused and exploited.
Those now in power in Washington, the Bush administration and Republican Party, have co-opted religion as a strategic political weapon. George W. Bush could never have been elected without members of the so-called Christian Right voting as a block and, though some may wonder at such broad Christian support of a leader whose conduct seems so diametrically opposed to the fundamental teachings of the Jesus they, and he, claim to worship, I believe the explanation is simple. Carl Rove and his president have simply taken maximum advantage of a vast right-wing simplemindedness. Oppose abortion, hate gays, praise Jesus and win! Many (not all) “fundamentalist” Christians are clearly more concerned with their place in the hereafter than they are with actually living by the fundamental teachings of the Rabbi Jesus. That ideal path is apparently too difficult for those who believe that they simply have to declare him as their personal savior and accept “holy” scripture as the infallible word of God. Done, we are saved. Now let’s go kill some Iraqis and, by the way, the rest of you are going to hell. Though a minority, the Christian Right carries weight far exceeding its numbers because certain power seekers are willing to undermine our constitution and churches for their short-term political gain. Too many church leaders preaching the modern, western and profoundly flawed doctrine of inerrant scripture enable this progressing disaster. That unfortunate premise is at the very root of the problem because virtually any political or religious supposition can be justified with a biblical reference. Although the Bible is a precious source of historic spiritual insight, its value is limited, unless read as it was written, through the living lens of direct experience of the divine. The men who actually wrote the words or interpreted and rewrote them understood this, at least into the nineteenth century and, for what it is worth, the apostle Paul seems to have said so in his second letter to the Corinthians, 3:6. Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. Yet, despite countless examples of diametrically opposed biblical passages and countless translations through multiple languages and cultures, the ludicrous assertion of inerrancy persists, conveying power to a few and inflicting spiritual blindness on millions. This positioning of scripture also informs my faith perspective on non-violence and pacifism. My peace testimony is not just about what Jesus might have said and did 2000 years ago. It is about what I believe God is saying now… and doing now…..in this very moment. We Quakers have confirmed, with absolute certainty that the seed of the divine is found within everyone, no matter their station, successes or sins….. or theology. That is the very heart of my personal testimony of peace. Pacifism: In his 1940 book “Christian Pacifism Re-Examined” Cecil John Cadoux wrote: “I do not contend that there are no strong arguments for the rightness of engaging in war under certain conditions. But whenever I feel disposed to agree to them, and draw the conclusion to which they point, I am held up by two stark facts which no non-pacifist argument I have ever seen helps me to surmount. One is the diabolical savagery of the acts of fighting, a savagery which makes any plea for their compatibility with Christian love an ethical farce. The other (reflected all too unmistakably in the ever-advancing size of the world’s armaments) is the chronic tendency of war to beget more war.” Training my own children in conscientious objection and draft resistance is important, but far more important are the messages and examples I have given my children from their earliest moments. I have raised them to be unfit for military service, by reason of conscience and faith because I pray for a world in which war becomes impossible for want of willing participants. That seemingly uncomplicated stance is complex, difficult and frankly, not always consistent. It is complicated by normal human instincts and complicated by social, cultural and nationalistic considerations and each of these are worthy of consideration and discussion. For example: how can I, a pacifist, accept and enjoy the freedoms and safety that others have died to protect? How dare I expect my children to be exempt when other children go? I have already answered those questions for myself but I leave them there for you to consider. This is not a easy question. Now consider war. Our money says, “In God we trust” and some pledge allegiance to “one nation under God.” Despite that, we live in a society that celebrates violence and enjoys it as entertainment. I will go farther; we are a people that love warfare. We worship it. We revel in it. We celebrate it and build statues to its heroes. War unites us and enlivens us. It gives us meaning. It defines us. Not just Americans, this applies to nearly all humans throughout recorded history. In the context of human history, peace is but the dishonest interlude between wars, during which we forget the horror and in fact, purge it from our imaginations. Only the victims, (warriors and wounded, homeless and orphan), remember, in grim silence. We build statues and memorials; but where is the shame? Many who have experienced combat describe it as transcendent and euphoric and as the defining moment of their lives never matched by any subsequent love or experience. The bond of altruistic love between comrades in arms is said to be unknowable to any, save those who have experienced it. War is the most natural expression of the human experience and yes, all the evidence of millennia of human existence suggests that we adore it. War is a constant and war most certainly brings us in touch with God; though that god may be called Mars, it is a god to us, nonetheless. That isn’t much fun to hear, or to say, but I believe it to be true and its truth is essential to understanding my “faith” perspective. I recently gained insight into this love of war from a book called “A Terrible Love of War” by James Hillman and I recommend it to you. From Page 1: “One sentence in one scene from one film, Patton, sums up what this book tries to understand. The general walks the field after a battle. Churned earth, burnt tanks, dead men. He takes up a dying officer, kisses him, surveys the havoc, and says: “I love it. God help me I do love it so. I love it more than my life.” We can never prevent war or speak sensibly of peace and disarmament unless we enter this love of war. Unless we move our imaginations into the martial state of soul, we cannot comprehend its pull. This means “going to war,” and this book aims to induct our minds into military service. We are not going to war “in the name of peace” as deceitful rhetoric so often declares, but rather for war’s own sake: to understand the madness of its love.” End quote. If you doubt the truth of America’s love of war just review history. The United States of America is a militaristic nation and has been almost from its beginnings. We claim to be a peace-loving nation but our own history proves that false. Can we change? Perhaps we can, if we face this truth and more importantly teach it, at home, in school and in our places of worship. But, first, we must remember, and then teach the truth. Many of us are now concerned with our occupation of Iraq but the illegal and greed driven invasion of Iraq is quite simply part of an American pattern. Does the following quotation sound familiar? “We are the ruling race of the world. We will not renounce our part in the mission of our race, trustee, under God of the civilization of the world. He has marked us as His chosen people. He has made us adept in government that we may administer government among savage peoples.” If you guessed Pat Robertson….. you’d be wrong. That was US Senator Albert Beveridge in 1900 and that mindset cost 600,000 Filipinos their lives.
Is Halliburton’s and big oil’s invasion of Iraq unique in our history? Not really. Between 1898 and 1934, for the sake of US business interests, the US Marine Corps invaded Cuba 4 times, Nicaragua 5 times, Honduras 7 times, the Dominican Republic 4 times, Haiti twice Guatemala once, Panama twice, Mexico 3 times and Columbia 4 times. By 1917 big business convinced our government that entry into WW 1 was in our national business interest. As ambassador to England W.H Page said the US had to declare war on Germany because it was, and I quote, “the only way of maintaining our pre-eminent trade status.” It wasn’t until years later in 1934, that General Smedley Butler said, “Our boys were sent off to die with beautiful ideals painted in front of them. No one told them that dollars and cents were the real reason they were marching off to kill and die.” Nothing really changes, especially the fact that we simply forget. Corporate media giants are complicit and co-conspirators with the corporate run national government. Television news outlets, (every network, not just Fox), were positively gleeful in the run up to the Iraq war. I remember CNN anchor Bill Hemmer saying about imbedded news people, “this is going to be really cool.” Of course, he is now with Fox News. While many of us protested to the government we allowed TV news to guarantee that our voices would be perceived as the cries and whispers of the lunatic fringe. That reality continues unchanged. When pacifists speak out against war they are called naďve, dangerous and unpatriotic. Many of you are familiar with the following quotation from Herman Goring: “The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.” Carl Rove could not have said it better. Hitler and Mussolini lost WW 2 but fascism, the merger of corporate and government interests, clearly survived and solidified its hold on the world. In the days and months immediately following 9/11, the United States had an unprecedented and historic opportunity. We had been martyred. 3000 innocent people had been murdered. At that brief and unprecedented moment we, as a nation could have changed the world. We could have focused on catching the criminals and leveraging a sympathetic world to positive change and true good. The greatest failures of George W. Bush and company are not a poorly run war, not bad pre-war intelligence, not the unnecessary war itself or the long-term damage done to our prestige in the world. Bush’s greatest failure is the lost opportunity to act like the compassionate conservative Christian he claims to be. More than 100,000 of God’s children are dead or wounded because of it. More will die today…and tomorrow …and the day after that. Sadly, the post 9/11 instinct for revenge and the seduction of war ruled most Americans and, it is clear that our leaders used that natural response to serve their own perverse agenda of conquest and business interests even as they were supported by the rallying cries of the corporate giants…(including the news media) all of whom profited from and continue to profit from the Iraq war. Combined with that reality and even though millions around the world spoke out and marched against the war, Mr. Bush’s other base, the so-called Christian right, gave its blessing and encouragement to war. In fact, a majority of those who would call themselves Christian, thus by definition a majority of Americans, were caught up once again in the righteous fever for war and revenge. How can this happen again, and again, and again, and again? I believe it is because we fail to remember. We fail to trust love. We fail again, and again to imagine; what war really means. Am I naive? NO! Those who believe that war can ever succeed are the naďve ones… and they are profoundly dangerous. What can we do? We can speak out to other faith communities. If they support war we can call them to account and attempt to call them back. Pat Robertson is not laughable and George W. Bush is neither stupid nor laughable. These men both represent themselves as spokesmen for Christianity and they are both directly responsible for countless innocent dead. When they speak as politicians we can answer them politically, but when they speak as Christians and tie that message to their politics; then all Christians, indeed all Americans of any faith must answer them, must repudiate them. Our founders understood the danger. Bush and company do not. To them it is just cynical political calculus…and people…. God’s children…. die. This is hard stuff. What right have I, or you to say another person’s version Christianity or faith is wrong? And yet, I believe that we must say so. We must speak Truth to power. Those who support war in Jesus’ name must be challenged….. at all opportunities and in all possible forums! How many times have you heard someone say that we need to hear the voices in the Muslim community that repudiate the language and actions of the extremists? Does the Christian community have less of a responsibility to repudiate the violence done in its name? Even harder; we must speak out, but, without malice or self-righteousness, and gently in the spirit of compassion, forgiveness and love. We must first call them to account and then call them back. We must model the Truth. This is best done not with angry accusation but by quiet, compassionate example and forthright speech. Hardest of all: Those who would mislead and those who are misled need to know that they are in our prayers. If they claim Jesus and support war then challenge them with Jesus! You don’t need to be a Christian to do that. Know his words and quote them liberally. In December 2005 Harper’s magazine there is an article about the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas (it didn’t make the official cut) and Thomas Jefferson’s vision of Jesus without the miracles. Regardless of your personal decision regarding the miracles and divinity of Christ the article is instructive. I quote: The relevance of Christianity to most Americans – then (in Jefferson’s time) and now – has far more to do with the promise of eternal salvation from this world than with any desire to practice the teachings of Jesus while we are here. But Jefferson’s bible also leads to an impressive clarification of what those teachings are. One can make a list and it need not be long.
I’d like to say a bit more about our national addiction to violence. This addiction is not just limited to warfare, militarism and violent entertainment. In America we imprison a higher percentage of our population than any nation in history. We are one of the few countries left on earth that executes people. Many oppose capital punishment because it is racist and it clearly is, but that shouldn’t be the primary focus of those who oppose it. Capital punishment is just wrong. If it were 100% fair from a racial perspective, it would still be wrong. It sends a message to our children and that message is pure evil. It debases all of us. Are capital punishment and horrific prison conditions what we should be modeling to our children? Are they compatible with your faith? Do we as citizens have a responsibility to resist these evils? The answers seem clear and I pray for the day when every house of worship in America makes a bold statement in opposition to the barbarity of capital punishment. The politicians will follow because they must. If our ultimate goal is to better the world, then I believe that our position on violence and war must approach absolute to have integrity. Again, I speak only for myself. Many Quakers struggle with that one but if I allow space for compromise arising out of convenience, uncertainty, weakness or fear, then I fail. I may fail anyway, but I will express the ideal without compromise. In addition, we cannot oppose violence and continue to support it as entertainment. We cannot teach our children peace and buy them violent video games and tickets to violent films. I confess to you now that I often fail to achieve this ideal even in my own family. So, what can we do? We can begin with a hard look in the mirror, me, you, all of us. Graphic and unrelenting media violence is as normal as breathing. We allow it to desensitize us, and our children, on a daily basis. We consume it and we savor it. Then when our government asks us to participate in the real thing we are incapable of even reacting with horror to real horror. The solution: The solution is to answer darkness with light. No matter how good our intentions or right our actions, without love they are nothing. We must stop accepting American needs as superior to human needs. We must stop accepting the needs of the wealthy (that includes everyone in this room, not just big business) as superior to the needs of the poor, the hungry, the imprisoned and forgotten. We cannot simply pay lip service to the teachings of compassion, forgiveness, charity, justice, and divine love. When these become our base, our touchstone and foundation, then there is hope for our children, no matter where in the world they may live. When William Penn was struggling with the pacifist teachings of George Fox, he was faced with a dilemma. A member of his class of gentlemen was required to carry a sword. He asked Fox what he should do and Fox answered Penn in typical Quaker/Zen fashion. He said, “Carry it for as long as you can.”
In terms of our growth toward rejection of war and all forms of violence, we must take a similar approach. We should carry our swords of acceptable media violence, unanswered government violence and personal violence for as long as we can. Not until we beat those swords into plowshares will our children, and all the children of the world, be safer. We must teach our children and be models for them as best we are able. We must also speak out to those who would endanger our children with lies and deceits that lead them away from the true teaching of the Rabbi Jesus…. and other enlightened masters throughout the ages. This is a life changing and life affirming commitment. It is my prayer that we might all struggle daily toward such an ideal. In closing I offer the following quotations from a few other “Quakers”: From The Upanishads: “Whoever sees all beings in himself and himself in all beings does not, by virtue of such realization, hate anyone….When, to that wise sage, all beings are realized as existing in his own self, then what illusion, what sorrow, can afflict him, perceiving as he does the Unity? From Black Elk of the Oglala Sioux: “The first peace, which is the most important, is that which comes within the souls of men when they realize their relationship, their oneness, with the universe and all its powers…..This is the real peace and the others are but reflections of this. The second peace is that which is made between two individuals, and the third is that which is made between two nations. But above all you should understand that there can never be peace between nations until there is first known that true peace which, as I have often said is within the souls of men.”
From The Buddha: Overcome anger by love; overcome evil by good; overcome greed by generosity; and the lie by truth. Speak the truth and do not yield to anger; give if you are asked, and by these steps you will go near the Gods.
Don Badgley is the Clerk of the Poughkeepsie Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends