The title of my sermon today is, “Swords or Plows – Is There a Choice?”  I have come to realize that the answer to that question is not nor has ever been an easy one, particularly for Christians.  For the most part, when it comes to war, Christians believe that the default position is one of pacifisms.  As Christ lives in us, it is just not “in us,” to cause harm to another person especially when thinking about taking the life of another person. Also, when it comes to war, we fully realize that there will always be “collateral damage,” which is a soft way of saying that the lives of innocent children, youth and adults will be taken.  Pacifists would affirm a song that was written some years ago, that begins with these words:  “War!  What’s it good for?  Absolutely nothing.”[1]

However, there is another side as can be seen in the insert to our bulletin today.  As a United Methodist Christian denomination we realize that when, peaceful alternatives have failed, the force of arms are regrettably necessary address the evil of “unchecked aggression, tyranny and genocide.”[2]

Several months ago, a mentally ill man who lived nearby an Amish community in Pennsylvania, entered the small classroom of an Amish Elementary school and, in cold blood, murdered the children in a cruel but systematic way.  The Amish people have always taught and practiced pacifism.  In keeping with the message of grace and redemption that was taught within their community of faith, the response of these grieving parents, grandparents and community shocked many people.  Instead of issuing words of criticism and hatred, they sent a delegation from their community to reach out to the wife and family of the murderer, offering symbols and words of love, forgiveness and comfort.  Many within the media community thought it a strange response for such a horrific crime. 

Pacifism is the way many have addressed evil, particularly the evil of aggression, threat and violence.  Pacifists base their belief on texts like today, when Micah prophesied that God would be the “divine arbitrator between nations and people, and swords would be beaten into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks.”   

Pacifists also point toward the example that Jesus set before us.  Yes, he would get angry and throw over the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple.  Yes, his faith and belief were made public.  But Jesus never one time gave us any foundation for responding to violence with violence.  Instead, he gave his followers rules of conduct in the Sermon on the Mount, particularly the section that we have named, “The Beatitudes.”  He gave us the Golden Rule that is often misquoted, but encourages:  "In everything do to others as you would have them do to you…”[3] He preached about the limitless rule of forgiveness.  And, on the night that Jesus was arrested, as Peter took his sword to defend Jesus, Jesus responded with these words, “...for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.”[4] 

A quick trip through Church history teaches us that pacifism was strictly taught in Christendom up to the 4^th Century A.D.  Christians would not resist evil with evil.  Even during the time of the great persecution of Christians, Christians believed that they could completely entrust their lives to God, even if it meant death to them or their neighbor.  The Book of Revelation is an example of this faith.  However, when Constantine legalized Christianity in 313, A.D, and made Christianity the national religion, theological answers were sought when wars were to be fought at a national level.  It was Bishop Augustine who offered a theological answer to war as he wrote the basis for the well known, “Doctrine of Just War.”  This Doctrine, or “Theory” as some call it, has been the predominate document that Christian nations have used throughout history when wars were to be fought.  Let me review the headings with you:  1. Just cause; 2. Right intention; 3. Legitimate authority; 4. Last resort; 5. Prospect of success; 6. Proportionality; and 7. Protection of the innocent.  However, we need to realize that throughout history there are those in most every religious community that did not accept the Just War Theory.

Walter Burghardt, a Catholic Priest and author of the book, “Justice: A Global Adventure,”[5] calls “Just War,” an oxymoron.  He says that it is a use of contradictory words, much like the phrase, “Jumbo Shrimp.”  War unto itself is immoral and evil, he writes.  However, he asserts that he is fully patriotic in his views and in love for his country.  Patriotism in itself is an act of love, love for one’s country.  He explains that when Christians apply their ideals and principles to patriotism it calls forth the kind of love that is not blind to evil, nor is being blind to the mindless attitude of “my country, right or wrong.”  Instead it is tough love that encourages the Christian patriot to stand beside the one who is experiencing injustice.  It is a stand of nonviolence.  And this kind of love is tough because it certainly is not the way of a coward, wimp, or the weakling.  Instead it is almost always costly.  In our own history, Martin Luther King, Jr., gave us a perfect example of this kind of tough but non-violent love.  This kind of proactive non-violent resistance stands between pacifisms and the Doctrine of Just War.

However, for many Christians, the Doctrine of Just War is an acceptable Doctrine for the Church.  Richard Niebuhr, who differed from his pacifist’s brother - Reinhold Niebuhr, helped the church embrace the Just War Theory during World War II as a biblically based doctrine.   He suggested that Jesus’ command to love one’s neighbor means using appropriate force to limit that neighbor when that neighbor is offending another.

The Just War Doctrine, then, does have biblical foundation.  In fact, the Just War Doctrine parallels the laws of our land.  Most lawyers can tell us that our laws are primarily based upon our Judaic-Christian heritage.  We have a legal system of police, lawyers, judges and jury that are used to apply and implement the laws that are set by our national, state and local governments.  The standards are supposed to be equal without partisanship.  When citizens support and uphold these laws, there is peace.  However, if citizens are not willing to uphold these laws, then an offense is created and the legal system gets involved so that justice will prevail.  That is the intent at least! 

Within hometown Charlotte, NC, loving our neighbor on a citywide basis implies supporting our laws and legal system so that the rights, dignity and human value of all people will be recognized and protected.  According to Niebuhr, to only focus on one’s own locale, one’s own state or nation, without seeing that one’s neighbor is in need of the same rights and dignity is not only selfish, it too is unloving.  The Just War Theory, according to Niebuhr, then is being willing do what is necessary to limit a neighbor with appropriate force when that neighbor does not show love of neighbor. 

But there are those within the Christian community who affirm the Just War Theory as an act of neighborly love but differ on how it is fully interpreted. Some believe in it so strongly that they believe that the US should make unilateral decisions about police actions when love of neighbor is to be demonstrated.  Others feel that it should never be unilateral, rather the global community should be involved and entrust such decisions to the vote of the United Nations.  Citizens and Christians can easily divide themselves over such decisions and unfortunately have!  War is a complicated animal!

Today, however, the world is faced with a new kind of evil.  It is called Terrorism.  It is helpful to remember that the Just War Doctrine was a theological document to theologically justify war between states.  However, due to religious fanaticism, terrorism does not always represent the state.  In fact, great harm can be done when any nation, ours included, confuses that point.  In 2004, at our General Conference, a resolution was adopted by the church that condemned terrorism and urged all nations across the globe to address terrorism with “appropriate law enforcement actions, consistent with internationally recognized human rights standards and due process, to prevent further acts of terror.”[6]  Terrorism is an extreme act of showing no love for neighbor.  It is a global issue of evil whereby collaboration with other nations will always be necessary.  We must find ways to communicate and resolve the hatred represented by terrorism.  However, in that resolve, justice must prevail otherwise we will cheapen grace and ignore the standards of peace.  May God help us in this goal.

Yes, as citizens of the Kingdom, regardless of which side of the issue of war we side with, pacifisms, non-violent resistance to evil and war, or the use of armed forces for a just war, as Christians we all pray that the words of the Prophet Micah will come true.  We do pray for and look for a day when we do not have to make a choice.  We dream of living in a world where all men and women learn to live peacefully with one another, when nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.   But until that day comes, we will have to face the reality of evil and we must choose.

May God help us with our choice!  Amen!