Dialog About Non-Violence

I wanted to take a moment to express my gratitude to the GPNW Mission Center for tackling a very complex topic at its conference on November 6—Non-Violence.  For those of you who may not have been there, the conversation revolved around a resolution brought to the conference by Scott Amos, a member of the Portland, OR congregation.  The text of that resolution can be found HERE.  Ultimately the resolution did not pass.  It failed by a margin (I think) of 58% to 42%.  But I wish to lift up Scott and the rest of the Mission Center because of what I considered to be a real engagement on the topic.

Indeed, the topic of non-violence is a complicated one.  I’ve wrestled with it a lot, and I don’t think I have ever found a complete and satisfying solution.  The topic is so complicated that the world conference of 2018 chose to highlight it by offering world-wide perspectives.  That world conference referred a similar resolution to the first presidency for guidance to the church, and the church is still awaiting a response from the presidency.  I, for one, am anxious to hear that response.  I expect it to answer for us some (but probably not all) of the questions we wrestled with ourselves earlier this month:

  • Are there situations when violence is not objectional?  Like self defense or bringing a population to order or capital punishment?
  • Who can appropriately judge the difference between police violence and the necessary use of force?
  • Does violence done by the state look different between ethnic, social, or cultural groups?  It certainly looks different to members of different countries with different histories of state-sponsored terror.  We heard that at the 2018 World Conference.
  • At what point does a demonstration turn to a riot?  Is there such a thing as a justified riot?
  • Is there such a thing as a justified war?
  • And ultimately (at least for me), can there be peace without justice; and can there be justice without violence?

I am humbled in the face of these questions.  I try to use Jesus as a model to write my moral code, but it’s hard.  He’s such a dynamic figure.  I can’t imagine Jesus participating in a criminal execution.  He actively discourages such an act in John, chapter 8.  Yet he goes into the temple and drives out the merchants with a whip in John chapter 2.  Was that a riot?  Jesus repeatedly refuses to be the military Messiah the people expected him to be, yet he takes mercy on the Centurion in Matthew, chapter 5 (and Luke, chapter 7).

In other words, I am proud of our church for having this discussion.  And Scott Amos, I think we should keep talking about this.  We may not yet all agree, but I believe the strength of a community rests in the ability to ask hard questions and stay united . . . not in its ability to avoid, deflect, or otherwise disengage from the things that really matter.  Let us be grateful we have a community that continues to ask difficult and meaningful questions and rest that we sometimes leave the difficult answers in the hands of God.