Aug. 17, 2009 issue
‘Peace’ author reply
By David Cortright Bristol, Ind.In Peace: A History of Movements and Ideas I do emphasize the limitations of absolute pacifism in responding to gross injustices and violations of human rights.
I emphasize the value of Gandhian nonviolent action as a means of resisting oppression while remaining true to religious principles of peace. I go further to articulate a position of pragmatic pacifism that allows for strictly limited use of force, within the rule of law and under multilateral authority, in response to genocide and mass killing, as articulated in the emerging principle of responsibility to protect.
I cite John Howard Yoder’s distinction between the use of police power and war, which he described in The Politics of Jesus as “a profound and a structural difference.” I find this helpful in identifying the type of strictly limited use of force that may be considered justifiable under the rubric of pragmatic pacifism. I never claim that Yoder supported such use of force. Yoder was a religious pacifist who never condoned the use of armed force.
I cite Yoder elsewhere in the book to emphasize the need for realism in attempting to follow the teachings of Jesus in a fallen world. The role of Christians, he wrote in “Peace without Eschatology,” is not to seek perfectionism but to strive for “progress in tolerability,” to strive for a world that, while not fulfilling the divine purpose, is nonetheless more pleasing to God and beneficial to humankind.
I was privileged to listen to Yoder lecture on just-war theory. He believed that a rigorous and consistent application of that ethical framework would rule out almost all uses of force. It would lead, he wrote in response to Reinhold Niebuhr, to “a pragmatic … pacifism and to the advocacy of nonviolent means of resistance.”
Comments
-
In this letter to the editor, David Cortright has confirmed what I said about his own position accepting limited violence that essentially uses the just war criteria. I am thankful that he clarified that he does not think Yoder himself would have accepted using violence (particularly for Christians). This seemed less clear in his book, so his letter is a helpful clarification.
Although Yoder made a distinction between war and policing in a few of his works, much of his limited thought on this matter is often decontextualized, as with the quote Cortwright cites from The Politics of Jesus. A helpful resource that puts this distinction back into context within Yoder's body of writings, and that makes plain his own position as a religious pacifist is my essay "Unbinding Yoder from Just Policing" in Power and Practices: Engaging the Work of John Howard Yoder (Herald Press, August 2009).
Andy Alexis-Baker (Elkhart, IN)
Comment on the article ‘Peace’ author reply
The purpose of comments is to engage in dialogue. We expect commenters to treat authors and each other as each would want to be treated. Respectful criticism is welcomed; offensive comments or parts of comments will be removed by the site administrator. Name and comment will be posted; email address is for follow-up only and will not be made public.
Download
Download a free PDF showing the populations of
Mennonite groups and other Anabaptists.
