Christianity and Violence

In contemporary America public life, exulting in violence has markedly increased. I am mostly troubled that violent language is used by those who profess to be Christians. It jars that threats, calls for retribution, the demonization of opponents, gleeful talk of lethality, and the celebration of violence arrive wrapped in the language of Christian faith. It is tempting to respond that these people are not real Christians. I understand the temptation, but the matter is not so simple. Christianity has a long and complicated relationship with violence, and the Christian and Jewish scriptures themselves contain narrative and language that is far from peaceful. It is easy enough to condemn violence when it comes from those with whom we disagree. It is more difficult to examine the language of our own traditions, particularly when that language is attributed to Jesus.

A nonviolentist is someone who seeks to reduce the amount of violence in the world (negatively) and seeks to increase the amount of loving kindness in the world (positively). It is a life commitment, and at times not very easy. Part of becoming nonviolent is to deal with your own inner violence: your capacity to hurt others, your rage, your willingness to lash out, your ego-protectiveness. An element of dealing with your own violent stuff is to watch your language. Removing violent speech from your usage is a challenge but can make a difference. Take note during a single day how much violence is in speech. “Shoot an email to your friend.” “Strike a bargain.” “Smother your toast with jam.” “Smash the ball.” “Hammer a point home.” “Kill two birds with one stone.” “I hate … (fill in the blank).” It might seem a small thing to change the way we speak, given the immense amount of violence in the world, but it’s important in the personal quest not to add to the world’s violence.

I have been a nonviolentist for a long time, at least in intention, if not always in practice. I came to nonviolence through the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament, or I should say, some of the teachings of Jesus. I read Jesus then, back in the 1980s, through the lens of the non-mainstream sects of the Reformation period in the sixteenth century. They argued that though there is much violence to be found in the Bible, if you looked at Jesus seriously (and for them somewhat literally) you would realize that Jesus was a pacifist, against war, and nonviolent to the point of not resisting the violence of others. Forty-something years ago, I found such a view of Jesus convincing. I began to consider myself a “Christian pacifist.” I remain a pacifist now, as convinced as ever that violence is the major problem that the world faces; not just war or acts of terrorism, but every form of violence, physical, psychological, sexual and systemic. And not just violence against other humans, but against all sentient beings, and Mother Earth too. A personal intention to become a nonviolentist is a modest but important step on the Way.

However, I no longer take the simplistic view that Jesus was a thoroughgoing nonviolentist. Whether he was or not is impossible to say. We get our view of Jesus through the filter of early Christianity. To be honest, it is a mixed viewpoint. In some passages it’s easy to see the agenda of the particular early Christian community whose member painted the portrait. In other passages about Jesus, it’s less easy to see how much the early Christians added their own gloss on Jesus. Scholars have tried their best to get through the mist of the early Church to find the “real” Jesus. The trouble is, the mist at times becomes a thick fog. It’s not possible to get a clear picture. So we are left with fragments, glimpses, and tantalizing insights into a first century mystic, teacher of love, political zealot, prophet, faith healer, and liberationist. Some of the fragments conflict with each other, and all readers of Jesus tend to pick those parts that agree with the Jesus they want to see. Those passages in the Bible that portray a Jesus who doesn’t fit with the one hoped for are explained away. “Jesus didn’t mean it like that, but like this …” Or else “That saying is likely not original.” Or else, we just pretend those sayings are not there.

For me, this is most difficult in the case of violent religious language from the lips of Jesus. For instance, Jesus said: “If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better to enter life maimed than to have two hands and be thrown into hell; If your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better to enter life lame than to have two feet and be thrown into hell; If your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.” This is powerfully violent language. The images of severed hands and feet, and eyes torn out are uncomfortably grisly. Ideas of hell and unquenchable fire and terrible suffering for those who “stumble” don’t bear thinking about. Those of us who want to see a nonviolent Jesus will doubtless rush to differing interpretations. Those who find little problem in violence, even the necessity of violence, will see Jesus here an ally to their cause.

Such intemperate and violent religious language has been used to justify much suffering. Arguments of this kind were employed in the medieval period to justify all manner of torture. Better to suffer physical and psychological pain now than be thrown into hell later. “The pain I cause you now will save you much greater pain in the afterlife,” said the inquisitor.

Whether Jesus really said those things I have no way of knowing. If Jesus did say them, did he mean his words to be taken literally? I hope to goodness not! Yet, even if taken as hyperbole, or metaphor, or some other figure of speech, it may suggest a fervent, violent religious practice. Religion too often becomes excessive, a kind of fanaticism, and fanaticism can provide a justification for violence.

I do wish these sayings were not in the Bible, and not from the lips of Jesus. But you can’t always get what you wish. So, for me, I choose not to live with such language; far better to offer words of loving kindness, and gentleness, and peace. Violent religious language? No thanks.

+Ab. Andy