Monday, 29 January 2007 00:00
Only a few decades ago, "making peace" was the exclusive province of prime ministers and presidents. For instance, no NGOs offered to mediate between President Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Since the end of the Cold War, however, the popular definition of peace seems to have expanded — at least in the English language — to allow non-state actors to participate in peace-building projects.
Along with avowedly secular organizations such as the International Crisis Group, religious communities have joined the growing collection of nongovernmental actors who are interested in building peace both locally and abroad. Religious groups are increasingly seeing their hitherto-unnoticed peace-building role in a more deliberate light. Many religious groups, and especially those associated with the Anabaptist tradition, are increasingly attempting to export their locally-proven conflict resolution methods internationally.
The pacifist convictions of Mennonite and Amish communities are well-known. However, the theological underpinnings of these commitments are less well-appreciated. The Schleitheim Confession, adopted by the Swiss Brethren in 1527, establishes the theological groundwork for Anabaptist-style pacifism. The entire document is phrased as a response to Protestant and Catholic opponents, who questioned the Brethren's belief in adult baptism and their steadfast refusal to participate in the affairs of state, including war. In response to these criticisms, the Brethren set out their convictions in the Schleitheim Confession, including their understanding of God, holiness, the world, and the proper nature of the Christian church.
According to the Schleitheim Confession, the world is a dark place, permanently separated from God's grace and ultimately subject to divine judgment at the end of time. The Brethren viewed the church as a safe haven in the midst of a rebellious world. The church is constituted as Christ's body and blessed with salvation by Christ from the coming judgment of the surrounding world.
The Schleitheim Confession teaches that the church, as the body of Christ, is called to imitate Jesus and follow his teachings. In trinitarian terms, the Brethren focus more heavily on the normative meaning of the incarnation of Jesus than on the sovereignty of God throughout the Scriptures or the dramatic power of the Spirit in the New Testament.
Thus, the pacifist convictions reflected in the Schleitheim Confession are the result of a two-pronged theology. First, the Brethen are convinced that war and other powers of the state are the very definition of worldliness. As such, their separationist mindset calls the Brethren to avoid such activities. Second, on a constructive level the Brethren believe that peace-building and peace-making are activities promoted and exemplified by Christ. As his self-identified followers, the Brethren are called to imitate his example of humble peace-making rather than the sword-driven policies of worldly governments.
Modern descendants of the Anabaptist tradition draw on the theological vocabulary and convictions narrated in documents like the Schleitheim Confession to express their own commitment to peace-building. It is important to note, however, that many modern descendants of the Anabaptist tradition who are interested in peace-building have adopted a more activist position with regard to the world.
Consider the example of the Christian Peacemaker Teams, which made worldwide news by sending teams into Iraq during the middle of the U.S. invasion. According to the Schleitheim Confession, while it is possible for individuals to escape the coming divine wrath by leaving the world and joining the church, the world itself seems to be a lost cause. If "it is not possible for anything to grow or issue from them except abominable things"1 then why bother taking risks for peace on behalf of unbelievers? It is unclear where organizations like Christian Peacemaker Teams derive their interventionist focus on peace-building outside the church. The international scope of their peace-making vision may simply reflect the increasingly globalized nature of social existence. More sophisticated understandings of peace and war might also provide modern adherents to the Anabaptist tradition with the intellectual tools to conceive of peaceful solutions in situations that were previously thought to be unresolvable. Although the rationale for these peace builders' outward focus may be difficult to fully understand in terms of the Schleitheim Confession, it is clearly motivated by a commitment to finding practical ways of living out Jesus' command to be peace-makers.
Besides the spiritual heirs of the Anabaptist tradition, other branches of Christianity have also adopted a more deliberate role in peace-making activities. One such organization is the International Center for Reconciliation (ICR) at Coventry Cathedral. The ICR is affiliated with the Anglican Church, and so does not have the same robust heritage of pacifism as organizations like Christian Peacemaker Teams. However, these groups have constructed their own theological articulation of Christianity's commitment to peace. Beyond theology, however, the ICR has mediated and celebrated its commitment to peace through a liturgical prayer called the Litany of Reconciliation.
In the case of the International Center for Reconciliation, the theological assumptions behind peace-building do not seem to require much elaboration. Both in the Litany and in formal presentations, the ICR communicates their view that Christ's reconciliation between humanity and God is a sufficient first cause for their own work. The Litany reflects this concern, with a reference to Christ's substitutionary reconciliation at the emphatic end of the prayer.
Although the Litany is phrased as a confession of sin to God, the confessed sins are articulated within an intense awareness of human community. While the traditional Anabaptist view holds a very dim view of the world's ability to live in peaceful communities, the ICR's Anglican heritage teaches that peaceful communities of all faiths can be sustained by God's common grace. As a result, the ICR's motivation is to extend God's reign of peace by emulating the mediatory work of Christ between God and man and by imitating God's forgiveness within human conflicts, regardless of the faith of those involved.
The Litany itself reflects the ICR's different approach to peace. As a liturgical prayer, the litany is meant to be offered in a context of communal Christian worship. Although the prayer's message would hardly be opposed by today's Mennonites, the liturgical nature of the prayer points to a subtle difference in the two religious communities' vision of peace. While the Schleitheim Confession opens with a defense of the doctrine of adult baptism, emphasizing the Christian faith as an individual experience, the Litany opens with a communal confession: "all have sinned."2
The Litany's opening prayer gathers the participants at the foot of the cross, reminding them of humanity's universal debt to God. It is in this place, at the bloody feet of Jesus, that the prayer is offered and that the act of human reconciliation occurs. Instead of emphasizing the distinction between those who are saved out of the world and those who are damned in the world, the Litany calls the participants — and implicitly the world — to recognize God's gracious gift in Christ. The rest of the Litany, which asks God's forgiveness for human sinfulness, continues to humble the participants until they recognize their common debt to God, opening the way for mutual forgiveness.
Indeed, the Litany so strongly emphasizes the importance of common humility that the prayer does not even mention a call to forgive one another until the last moment, when it is phrased as a concluding exhortation to the participants. Forgiveness, in the understanding of the ICR, only takes place after an appropriate recognition of the sovereignty of God and humanity's debt to him. From that place, Christians are empowered to imitate Christ's reconciliation by reconciling with one another and calling the world to reconciliation. The commitments to peace represented by Christian Peacemaker Teams and the International Center for Reconciliation are deeply shaped by their respective niches within the Christian tradition. The different understandings of peace that these organizations hold are instructive and illuminating in their own right. These organizations, however, also function as lenses that can expand our view of religious motivation and participation in peace-building activities.
In particular, the diversity in focus, vocabulary and theological articulation by these two groups emphasizes the creative opportunities for peace-building that occur within Christianity. The creative energy of these groups is particularly noticeable when considered within the context of their broader theological traditions. The Anabaptist faith has always held a pacifist position, but groups like Christian Peacemaker Teams are transforming this traditionally passive refusal to participate in the affairs of state into an active movement to bring God's peace into extremely complex and deeply-rooted conflicts. These Anabaptist groups have realized that peace-building need not be the exclusive responsibility of governments; they have discovered that there is room for private individuals and organizations to participate in this process. The realization that they can bring their peaceful vision to the world without being forced to work through the agency of government has freed their creative energies and opened up a new vision for global peace-building.
The International Center for Reconciliation is also an energetic exception to the Anglican tradition. While the Anglican tradition has always emphasized the importance of communal worship and community life, the ICR is uniquely committed to the reconciliation aspects of community life. While the Westminster divines who authored the Shorter Catechism would certainly not deny the efficacy of Christ's reconciliation and its transformative power for human communities, the tradition as a whole did not emphasize this aspect of Christian community more than its other characteristics. Indeed, the community at Coventry Cathedral did not especially emphasize the idea of reconciliation until the cathedral was bombed during World War II. This traumatic experience prompted a re-examination of the concept of Christian reconciliation as Coventry attempted to respond in forgiveness to the Germans who bombed the cathedral. Once freed to understand reconciliation in this way, however, the Anglican community at Coventry began to grasp a broader vision for reconciliation around the world, leading to the creation of the International Center for Reconciliation.
Ultimately, the very different stories of Christian Peacemaker Teams and the International Center for Reconciliation are encouraging reminders that there are resources within the Christian faith for addressing the toughest problems of conflict and war. Moreover, while the Anglican and Anabaptist traditions have in some ways led the way in integrating their faith with the globalized call to peace-building, other traditions have unique communal and theological resources that they can bring to the table of peace as well. Indeed these different branches of Christianity, disparate in many other respects, can find much to agree on as they hold out the message of peace to a deeply conflicted world.
