Christians and Violence: A Misuse of the Faith

In my last post (Christians and Violence:  Called to Love) we began to look at the issue of living out a public faith.  Particularly we are using the issue of violence as an example of a public faith lived out wrongly.  Also as a guide we are referring to Miraslov Volf's latest book, A Public Faith:  How Followers of Christ Should Serve the Common Good.  Volf points out in his book that there are two essential errors we must look to avoid when living out our faith.  The first error is "idleness."  Just as it sounds, idleness points to a person who professes faith but thinks it is only personal, not meant to engage the public arena in any way.  This type of public faith (or lack thereof) falls short. On the other end of the spectrum is what Volf refers to as "coerciveness."  This is when one attempts to ultimately force their faith upon another.  This is usually when violence in the name of Christianity occurs.  This too is an error and falls short.  This second point is the focus of this post today. 

Volf argues in his book that "the Christian faith is misused when it is used to underwrite violence" (p.51).  I must say that I agree.  The biblical record seems clear to me that Christians are not to involve themselves in violence even in self-defense.  I know that statement will draw the ire of some of my brothers and sisters. 

Let me share a few examples:  Jesus said turn the other cheek (Matt. 5:39); love your enemies (Matt. 5:44); be salt and light to the world (Matt. 5:14-16); imitate Christ in the way of self-sacrificial love (John 15:12-13; 13:34-35); carry our own cross (Matt. 10:38-39); imitate Christ in suffering and not retaliate (1 Peter 2:21-23).  These are just a few among many others. 

Also, a theme of the OT that's reiterated in the NT is this:  The battle belongs to the Lord.  It is not yours or mine to fight.  Volf states in his book:  "Though imitating God is the height of human holiness, there are things that only God may do.  One of them is to deploy violence" (p.50).  When a Christian picks up a weapon with the intend to harm another rather than picking up the cross to follow Christ then something is out of alignment. 

From this some questions arise.  How did we get here?  How have Christians allowed the faith to become acquainted with violence?  How do prevent this from happening further?  Volf answers these questions by examining convictions and where they are rooted.  Where we place our convictions makes a huge difference.  Volf writes:

"If we strip Christian convictions of their original and historic cognitive and moral content and reduce faith to a cultural resource endowed with a diffuse aura of the sacred, in situations of conflict we are likely to get religiously legitimised violence.  If we nurture people in historic Christian convictions that are rooted in its sacred texts, we will likely get militants for peace.  This, I think, is a result not only of a careful examination of the inner logic of Christian convictions; it is also born by a careful look at actual Christian practice" (p.51).

Ultimately, when we look at the character of the Christian faith and its fundamental convictions we see that they are not violence inducing.  In fact, taken at face value they are just the opposite.  When Christ calls a person, he bids them to come and die, not to go out and kill.  When Christians get this backwards not only does the faith become coercive, but it also fails to imitate Christ.