NonViolence

[Orionthehunter]

Part 2

From JimR-OCDS: Nowhere did I call anyone ignorant, narrow minded. Yes there are those who practice religion, but lack spirituality, this is a fact of life and it reflects in the way they treat people. I didn’t direct it at anyone specifically.

No, you just said they weren’t “spiritual” or “followers of Christ.”

From JimR-OCDS: But I was talking about people who attack reject nonviolence as a way of life and often attack the people who promote it. Look at all the people who promoted and lived lives of nonviolence and you’ll see that governments considered them dangerous, more dangerous than terrorist themselves.

But you described them as people who support this war. I know alot of good holy people who are non-violent Christian Catholics who don’t ever so much as speak a violent word and support this war.

From JimR-OCDS: I knew this would be a hard subject to talk about in an objective manor when I posted it. I’m amazed that it would be difficult in a Catholic Forum.

It would have been easier if you hadn’t attacked them as being unspiritual or not followers of Christ. They only exercised their prudential judgement and reached a conclusion different from yours. Your spiritual journey is yours. You would be wise to not presume to project that onto everyone else.

From JimR-OCDS: You mention evil in the world, but evil in the world has existed since Adam and Eve. Often, evil is perpetrated by those who say they are fighting against evil.

And, often is evil is perpetrated by those who in the name of peace refuse to defend the defenseless.

From JimR-OCDS: The justifications for these acts, fall on their face in light of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Yet, the arguments justifying such acts are given, with along with venom.

And just as NCJohn supported this war out of humanitarian reasons, people can conclude that the refusal of people to take up arms to defend the people of Darfur fall on their face in light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Jim, you don’t have a corner on divine wisdom.

From JimR-OCDS: Even though Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict said the war in Iraq was not just, many Catholics argue that it is. How can this be? Is it because we’re a violent society in general, who’s moral compass is broke?

The views of the Popes are expressions of their moral leadership as discerned by their prudential judgment. It isn’t spoken with the charism of infallibility. We as Catholics are free to reach a different prudential judgment so long as we do so through the prism of our Catholic faith as revealed to us by the Holy Spirit.

 

[blessedstar]

**c.c.c.1825 Christ died out of love for us, while we were still "enemies."100 The Lord asks us to love as he does, even our enemies, to make ourselves the neighbor of those farthest away, and to love children and the poor as Christ himself.101 **

 

[Orionthehunter]

From JimR-OCDS: Since I’ve been going down this path, I’ve become amazed at the amount of rejection and even hate filled responses I’ve received, especially in Christian forums, when I speak of nonviolence, especially in rejection of the current war we’re involved in.

Jim, you have reached a conclusion regarding this war using your prudential judgment. This is what we are all to do regarding moral and social issues. However, to be surprised that others have reached a different prudential judgment and have rejected your position is naive and disrespectful of fellow Christians who have the same obligation to use their prudential judgment.

With regards to “hate filled responses”, grow up. Just look at the hate filled responses anti-war proponents spew at George Bush all the tiime. Hate is not the exclusive property of those who support the war.

From JimR-OCDS: However, I’ve also received much acceptance, confirmation and agreement. I think that I’ve come to understand why there are different attitudes from Christians in how they accept the concept of living in the spirit of nonviolence.

Well, congratulations all-knowing one.

From JimR-OCDS: One group, practices religion. They follow all the rubrics to the letter and demand that everyone else follow them. They also demand that you accept what they accept and reject what they reject. They have the least amount of understanding when it comes to discusions on nonviolence. Of course, they support the so called “war on terror,” as it’s being played out by this administration.

They other group are those who are contemplatives, the spiritual followers of Christ. They understand and have a grasp on the entire subject. They of course reject this so called war on terror.

I can’t remember what this is called in learned terms but it is judging others by whether or not they agree with you. Those who disagree are not as good a person as you and those who agree with you are better people. Read closely how you use denigrating terms for those you disagree and call those who agree with you as “spiritual” and “followers of Christ”. In a Catholic forum to refer to those who have reached a prudential judgment different from you as “unspiritual” and not “followers” is slanderous.

From JimR-OCDS: We live in a violent society and not many people talk about living a life in the spirit of nonviolence.

Not many in your eys? Just those who agree with you.

See part 2 below

 

[blessedstar]

**c.c.c.1825 Christ died out of love for us, while we were still "enemies."100 The Lord asks us to love as he does, even our enemies, to make ourselves the neighbor of those farthest away, and to love children and the poor as Christ himself.101 **

To begin with kindness in our words might be a starting point for peace.

 

[Swamp_Yankee]

I read this thread last night and woke up thinking about it this morning. My thoughts are a little disjointed, but here it goes.First to Steve M, I say Amen, Amen. To others . You should love your enemies, you should not let them oppress you. Pray for their souls after you run out of ammo. To Jim. The prisoners at Abbu Gareb( according to the photos I saw) were treated less harshly than a fraternal hazing. They were humilated not tortured. Those who would trade their freedom for non-violence will get neither. Lastly peace is not achived through wishful thinking, it is only achived when your enemy looses the will or ability to fight. What would ST. Michael think of non-violence?

 

[cheeto1]

I read this thread last night and woke up thinking about it this morning. My thoughts are a little disjointed, but here it goes.First to Steve M, I say Amen, Amen. To others . You should love your enemies, you should not let them oppress you. Pray for their souls after you run out of ammo. To Jim. The prisoners at Abbu Gareb( according to the photos I saw) were treated less harshly than a fraternal hazing. They were humilated not tortured. Those who would trade their freedom for non-violence will get neither. Lastly peace is not achived through wishful thinking, it is only achived when your enemy looses the will or ability to fight. What would ST. Michael think of non-violence?

I don’t want to, but I’m afraid I agree with this. My uncle went to
Iraq, and came back alive. There they found many plans for
attacks on America, including hospitals and elementary schools.
They weren’t done yet on 9/11, and I don’t see why we had to
talk about weapons of mass destruction all the time. Somehow,
some governmental people knew where these plans were, and
that’s where they went. The Iraq government of the time was not
interested in arresting these people, they liked the idea that
America should be attacked some more.

I had a dear friend, 95 years old, who said that we don’t need a
government, we can live in peace without one. I said how can
that be? He said that it can be done, but it may cost your life.
Now, who in America is willing to pay that price?

 

[Joysong]

Jim,

I remembered this scripture as I read your thread:

Lk. 9:51-55 “And it came to pass, when the days of his assumption were accomplishing, that he steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem. And he sent messengers before his face; and going, they entered into a city of the Samaritans, to prepare for him. And they received him not, because his face was of one going to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John had seen this, they said: Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them? And turning, he rebuked them, saying: You know not of what spirit you are.”

I think the disciples remembered the incident in the O.T. where Elias rained fire on his adversaries. Yet Jesus taught the disciples a higher way, the way of forgiveness and peace, proving it in the example of His own death

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Jim,

I remembered this scripture as I read your thread:

Lk. 9:51-55 “And it came to pass, when the days of his assumption were accomplishing, that he steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem. And he sent messengers before his face; and going, they entered into a city of the Samaritans, to prepare for him. And they received him not, because his face was of one going to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John had seen this, they said: Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them? And turning, he rebuked them, saying: You know not of what spirit you are.”

I think the disciples remembered the incident in the O.T. where Elias rained fire on his adversaries. Yet Jesus taught the disciples a higher way, the way of forgiveness and peace, proving it in the example of His own death

Joysong, beautiful example!

In Carmel
Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I read this thread last night and woke up thinking about it this morning. My thoughts are a little disjointed, but here it goes.First to Steve M, I say Amen, Amen. To others . You should love your enemies, you should not let them oppress you. Pray for their souls after you run out of ammo. To Jim. The prisoners at Abbu Gareb( according to the photos I saw) were treated less harshly than a fraternal hazing. They were humilated not tortured. Those who would trade their freedom for non-violence will get neither. Lastly peace is not achived through wishful thinking, it is only achived when your enemy looses the will or ability to fight. What would ST. Michael think of non-violence?

Many of the people who were arrested and sent to Abu Ghraib, including those in the photos that we saw, were picked up for questioning, and were not charged with crimes.

What was done to them was immoral and unjust.

We would not tolerate that in our own country, even people who are arrested for crimes, why would we try to brush it off as nothing more than mere hazing, when done to Iraqis, who were not charged with crimes?

We’re a nation of people who are suppose to hold to a high moral standard. We obviously have deceived ourselves.

The violence done to these men, has a lot to say about what’s in the hearts of many Americans. Violence begins in the heart.

Jim

 

[Orionthehunter]

Joysong, beautiful example!

In Carmel
Jim

Jim, I think you are missing the point of Joysongs post. She is saying that the disciples couldn’t see into the heart of those who didn’t recieve Christ as the disciples thought appropriate and upon whom they wanted to throw rain on them in judgment. But Christ said, you can’t see into their hearts just as Joysong is nicely trying to say that you can’t see into the hearts of those who happen to disagree with you on the war.

Also, what was done to those in Abu Graib shows only what is in the hearts of the perpetrators. Why are you so intent in impugning the hearts of people who disagree with you and speakign with verbal violence that you claim to abhor?

 

[Vaclav]

Many of the people who were arrested and sent to Abu Ghraib, including those in the photos that we saw, were picked up for questioning, and were not charged with crimes.

The RUC did the same thing to Catholics at one point in Northern Ireland. It is called internment. They also employed torture (or “hazing” though I’m guessing many of you wouldn’t have enjoyed these “hazing” rituals) as a tactic.

Violence very often begets more violence. This is especially true when dealing with something as unorthodox as guerilla warfare or terrorism. These things can create generations of animosity and we have seen that in both Northern Ireland and Israel. Heavy handed tactics failed to put an end to the sectarian violence in both locations.

 

[blessedstar]

Heavy handed tactics failed to put an end to the sectarian violence in both locations.

I agree, but peace talks did result in the Good Friday Agreement and now what is happening is beyond everyone’s wildest dreams, both parties at the same table talking peace and looking for ways to maintain a peacful Ireland by joint leadership.

Thank God, thank His Holy Mother and thank St Patrick

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Jim, I think you are missing the point of Joysongs post. She is saying that the disciples couldn’t see into the heart of those who didn’t recieve Christ as the disciples thought appropriate and upon whom they wanted to throw rain on them in judgment. But Christ said, you can’t see into their hearts just as Joysong is nicely trying to say that you can’t see into the hearts of those who happen to disagree with you on the war.

Also, what was done to those in Abu Graib shows only what is in the hearts of the perpetrators. Why are you so intent in impugning the hearts of people who disagree with you and speakign with verbal violence that you claim to abhor?

Actions speak louder than words. I can see people supporting a war. War is violent. I don’t need to see into their hearts what they’re supporting.

You seem to have justified in your mind, the actions at Abu Ghraib.

I can’t and won’t.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I agree, but peace talks did result in the Good Friday Agreement and now what is happening is beyond everyone’s wildest dreams, both parties at the same table talking peace and looking for ways to maintain a peacful Ireland by joint leadership.

Thank God, thank His Holy Mother and thank St Patrick

So, nonviolence gave better results than violence. Good example!

God Bless
Jim

 

[Vaclav]

I agree, but peace talks did result in the Good Friday Agreement and now what is happening is beyond everyone’s wildest dreams, both parties at the same table talking peace and looking for ways to maintain a peacful Ireland by joint leadership.

Thank God, thank His Holy Mother and thank St Patrick

Definitely. There is still a long road to travel and a lot of pain and suffering on both sides to heal, but to think how far things have come that Ian Paisley (I’m trying not to type anything bad by his name) met with Gerry Adams and they actually came to an agreement for a government at Stormont. Who would have even imagined that?

No amount of torture, murder, slander, hate, rage, bombs, conspiracies, massacres, and sheer force brings about this kind of result.

But yes, prayers are still needed for continued peace in Northern Ireland, wouldn’t you agree blessedstar?

 

[Joysong]

Orionthehunter:

Jim, I think you are missing the point of Joysongs post. She is saying that the disciples couldn’t see into the heart of those who didn’t recieve Christ as the disciples thought appropriate and upon whom they wanted to throw rain on them in judgment. But Christ said, you can’t see into their hearts just as Joysong is nicely trying to say that you can’t see into the hearts of those who happen to disagree with you on the war.

Well, not exactly my point; i.e., seeing into the heart of others. I compared the incident to that of Elias, who rained vengence on those who opposed religion, just as the apostles wished to do to the Samaritans for not receiving Christ.

drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=12&ch=1&l=14&f=s#x

2 Kings 1:10 And Elias answering, said to the captain of fifty: If I be a man of God, let fire come down from heaven, and consume thee, and thy fifty. And there came down fire from heaven, and consumed him, and the fifty that were with him.

Here is the footnote on that verse:

10 “Let fire”… Elias was inspired to call for fire from heaven upon these captains, who came to apprehend him; not out of a desire to gratify any private passion; but to punish the insult offered to religion, to confirm his mission, and to show how vain are the efforts of men against God, and his servants, whom he willeth to protect.

I was offering my views on spiritual wars. Many think it is perfectly ok to spew vitriolic hatred toward another who does not share their vision of religion and verbally condemn them in slanderous discourse, and if it were permissible, to have fire consume them.

Jim brought up a good point when Jesus healed the ear of His enemy when Peter defended Jesus, probably out of the same spirit … that it’s lawful to react with violence whenever someone strikes at the heart of the sacred (Jesus). It is not, and I simply provided him with another incident where Jesus rebuked his disciples. This was the error of the zealots in Jesus time, as many believed that He would restore the kingdom with the sword. “Vengence is mine, says the Lord … I will repay.”

 

[blessedstar]

Well, not exactly my point; i.e., seeing into the heart of others. I compared the incident to that of Elias, who rained vengence on those who opposed religion, just as the apostles wished to do to the Samaritans for not receiving Christ.

drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=12&ch=1&l=14&f=s#x

2 Kings 1:10 And Elias answering, said to the captain of fifty: If I be a man of God, let fire come down from heaven, and consume thee, and thy fifty. And there came down fire from heaven, and consumed him, and the fifty that were with him.

Here is the footnote on that verse:

10 “Let fire”… Elias was inspired to call for fire from heaven upon these captains, who came to apprehend him; not out of a desire to gratify any private passion; but to punish the insult offered to religion, to confirm his mission, and to show how vain are the efforts of men against God, and his servants, whom he willeth to protect.

I was offering my views on spiritual wars. Many think it is perfectly ok to spew vitriolic hatred toward another who does not share their vision of religion and verbally condemn them in slanderous discourse, and if it were permissible, to have fire consume them.

Jim brought up a good point when Jesus healed the ear of His enemy when Peter defended Jesus, probably out of the same spirit … that it’s lawful to react with violence whenever someone strikes at the heart of the sacred (Jesus). It is not, and I simply provided him with another incident where Jesus rebuked his disciples. This was the error of the zealots in Jesus time, as many believed that He would restore the kingdom with the sword. “Vengence is mine, says the Lord … I will repay.”

Beautiful!

 

[blessedstar]

Definitely. There is still a long road to travel and a lot of pain and suffering on both sides to heal, but to think how far things have come that Ian Paisley (I’m trying not to type anything bad by his name) met with Gerry Adams and they actually came to an agreement for a government at Stormont. Who would have even imagined that?

No amount of torture, murder, slander, hate, rage, bombs, conspiracies, massacres, and sheer force brings about this kind of result.

But yes, prayers are still needed for continued peace in Northern Ireland, wouldn’t you agree blessedstar?

Yes I do agree prayer will always be needed to keep the peace once peace has been established. The prayer of the people of Ireland from both sides and of those in the world who desired peace in Ireland is now manifesting the fruits of those heartfelt and often sorrowful prayers.

Those prayers brought peace by the mercy of God because two sides of hardened hearts are softened, both sides desiring peace.

Men left to their own devices soon fall back into old ways, we see this in Sacred Scripure especially the OT so many times, continued and continuous prayer is needed for peace, so praying with our lives.

You say it so beautifully where you speak about no amount of violence will bring peace. I agree with you…‘He who lives by the sword will die by the sword’ but peace will not be obtained by the sword; it takes peace by force and only for one set of peoples, this is counterfeit peace, no peace at all.

A sincere dialogue for peace between peoples is what we must continue to pray for in the whole world and in all nations.

 

[Steve_M]

Actions speak louder than words. I can see people supporting a war. War is violent. I don’t need to see into their hearts what they’re supporting.
Jim

Some people supported the US Civil War and even joined the Union Army in order to help free the slaves. That was an extremely violent war. Was it immoral for someone to support it?

 

[blessedstar]

Some people supported the US Civil War and even joined the Union Army in order to help free the slaves. That was an extremely violent war. Was it immoral for someone to support it?

History only tells us what people saw fit to do at the time, it does not give us a blueprint for the future.

I can look back and say slavery is wrong now as it was then, I can say now that to kill to end slavery is not just but if I was there at the time I cannot say.

One thing I know, none of the Apostles fought, were violent or took up a sword to obtain their freedom when they were imprisoned for being a follower of Christ Jesus. There is a great lesson in that to all of us or have we forgotten that these Christians were not only known for their love of each other but their love of all people manifest in their prayer.

When we pray for peace what we really are praying for is conversion to Christ Jesus because fully living the Gospel of Christ Jesus is the only way to peace and peace is Christ.