Not with a bang

Lent courses are ending everywhere – some with a flourish and ours not with a bang, as we were considering peace-making and loving your enemies.  We talked a bit about non-retaliation and pacifism, especially whether it is right to keep your personal integrity whilst benefiting from others getting their hands morally dirty defending you from enemies. 

I had brought along a copy of a little leaflet a colleague had given me, which was produced by the Central Board for Conscientious Objectors (C.O.s) in 1944.  It set out questions that C.O.s were likely to be asked by Tribunals so they could prepare their answers.  Religious Objectors could expect some pretty bizarre enquiries:

“Christ’s method of dealing with the evil-doer was to threaten him will Hell – Can you state any single instance where Christ won over the evil-doer by love?”   Hum.

or:  “Do you not nullify Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross by your refusal to fight against evil?”  Double-hum.

or: “Why do you object to killing if you believe in the Resurrection?”  Well, I guess these all at least prove a greater ability to use Christian language than we would find today.

But the difficult one was, “Don’t you think yours is a very selfish religion?”    – presumably going back to the ‘keeping oneself pure at the expense of others’ dilemma.  As one of the group remarked, we don’t know half of what goes on to keep us safe, nor what it costs,spiritually and morally, those individuals who act on our behalf.

But what about enemies?  Can we eliminate them by understanding them and turning them into those we ‘love’ (and Karen Armstrong says that ‘love’ in this context means not ‘like’ but rather treat as someone you have made an loyal alliance with, in a legal sense)?

Or do we actually need enemies to help us define who we are and hold ever more strongly to our values and beliefs?  They say that faith becomes much more vigorous when it’s under attack …  And on a personal level, do we seek enemies, real and imaginary – even internal sinful shadow selves – that throw into sharper relief who we are or would like to be?

This entry was posted in compassion, War. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Not with a bang

  1. Eamonn says:

    I think feeling we need enemies to define what we are is rather dangerous. I grew up in an environment where that attitude was rife, and where people felt constantly under attack from one quarter or another. The result was thirty years of lethal conflict.

    Besides, isn’t that what’s happening now, with the global return to fundamentalisms of various kinds?

  2. alisonpeden says:

    I agree, and the point that was being made in our discussion was perhaps that we seek or even create enemies when we are uncertain, as we so often are as a community or an individual. And as you say, the result is a toxic harshness and fundamentalism. It’s much harder to live with porous boundaries.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s