In The News

---

WHAT OF ARMED CONFLICT?


While it is suggested that ISIS and the Crusades are of similar or like nature, there is a pronounced difference. “For starters,” professor Thomas Madden observes, “the Crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a direct response to oppression—an attempt to turn back or defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands.” I was reminded of this recently when reading an appeal from a Roman Catholic cleric for his parishioners to defend their families and residences against the incursion of Boko Haram in Nigeria.
Having lived in Jerusalem for several years, Christians raised in the region are especially sensitive to the fact that the Christian faith took root there. They also feel pain in being driven from the land of their birth. For instance, Bethlehem has traditionally been a Christian village, but Christians now number only about twenty percent.
I also engaged in two short term teaching assignments in Nigeria. On one occasion, my wife and I visited the home of one of my students in the Northeastern section of the country. This location has recently been subject to hostile action, and accompanied by considerable loss of life.
Secular options, as evidenced in North Korea, can likewise be oppressive. Some seem to focus on religious oppression, by way of promoting a secular alternative.
In greater detail, there are various approaches to armed conflict among Christians, according to a text edited by Robert Clouse, entitled: War: Four Christian Views. These are nonresistance, pacifism, just war, and preventive war. Initially, the nonresistant stance permits Christians to participate in armed conflict only as non-combatants, while pacifism maintains that they must assume no role whatsoever.
The just war theory sets out as criteria: just cause, just intention, last resort, formal declaration, limited objectives, proportionate means, and noncombatant immunity. Current terrorism would obviously not qualify. Consequently, revenge, conquest, economic gain, or ideological supremacy are unacceptable.
Finally, the preventive war option allows for engagement to prevent an attack or otherwise blatant injustice, along with the anticipation that it may deter armed conflict. This, in turn, recalls the saying: “Prevention is the best cure.”
Several observations seem in order. (1) You will hear of wars and rumors of war, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come” (Matt. 24:6). So that we ought not be carried away by some utopian fantasy, but make provision for armed conflict.
(2) Nonetheless, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God” (Matt. 5:9). While the term peace is understood not simply as a lack of conflict, but a genuinely healthy society. Then, too, the alleged purpose of war is to achieve peace.
(3) The failure to take appropriate action may also imply that we are culpable. John Calvin reasoned in this regard that if we can save a life and fail to do so, we are guilty of murder.
(4) The current situation with terrorism is utterly deplorable, and not to be written off by alleged similarities. Accordingly, Fred Abrahams, special adviser for the Human Rights Watch, reports: “We had shocking stories of forced religious conversion, forced marriage, and even sexual assault and slavery—and some of the victims were children.” Not to mention that some were beheaded.
(5) Everyone can do something. If nothing else, one can pray, and more is accomplished by prayer than this world realizes. Most can contribute to meeting the needs of those being oppressed. Corporate action can also be taken to reduce or eliminate oppression in some instances. By whatever legitimate means, blessed are the peacemakers.

---

PLEASE ENCOURAGE AUTHOR BELOW LEAVE COMMENT ON ARTICLE