3.1 War and Peace (PACIFISM)

Question 1

Matthew 26

Answer 1

Jesus said, ‘Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword’

Question 2

Pacifists general viewpoint

Answer 2

They are opposed to violence and conflict on the basis that it is inherently wrong to harm or kill other human beings.

Pacifists viewpoint is consistent with the primary precept of preserving life in natural law.

Question 3

Origins of Pacifism

Answer 3

• Position held by Christians in the first 300 years.
• Early Christians argued that being a Christian precluded them from being a solider (they had to swear allegiance to Caesar which they felt would imbue him with divine status.
• Early Christian’s felt using a sword to kill enemies went against the teachings of Jesus.

Question 4

Jesus as a pacifist

Answer 4

• Pacifists argue Jesus preached and modelled a law of no-resistance, implying that no war is ever just.
• Only Jesus, as the redeemer of humanity, can truly argue for Pacifism.
• In Sermon on the Mount said ‘Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Question 5

Two Christian Groups that argue for pacifism

Answer 5

MENNONITES: A church which grew out of the Protestant Reformation in the early 1500s - refuse to take part in military action on the ground we should love our enemies.

QUAKERS: Christian movement dedicated to peaceful principles and a rejection of any forms of violence.

Question 5

Non- resistence

Answer 5

The practice of not resisting authority, even if it is acting unjustly.
Rejects all forms of physical resistance and physical violence exercised by an individual, a group or institution.
It doesn’t allow for any form of self-defence and refuses retaliation.

Pacifists feel it is in their duty to follow the footsteps of Jesus.

Pacifists believe that war is inconsistent with the ethic of love.

Question 6

History of pacifism

Answer 6

• Became a political movement in the turn of the twentieth century.
• During the First World War, many men chose to become conscientious objectors and refused to engage in any form of military action because they held to the principle of pacifism.
• Many faced imprisonment and hostility because of their choice.
• The rise of fascism in Europe in the 1930s led some pacifists to decide that war could sometimes be justified as the lesser of two evils.

Question 7

Absolute vs relative pacifism

Answer 7

ABSOLUTE PACIFISM: argues for a complete and universal rejection of war and conflict. The moral truth that life has inherent value is absolute. War can never be morally justified because it goes against this principle. associated with the teachings of Jesus and Gandhi.

RELATIVE PACIFISTS: argue against violence and war but accept that at times war is the lesser of two evils. An absolute position is too idealistic, commitment to peace has to be idealistic on the situation.

Question 8

Active vs selective pacifism

Answer 8

ACTIVE PACIFISM: Argues for political engagement through campaigns to promote peace. It politicises debates around peace leading to active campaigns against specific wars.

SELECTIVE PACIFISM: Pacifist about certain methods and actions. Might argue that using weapons of mass destruction would have devastating consequences and result in a war without winners. Also a belief that some wars are justified.

Question 9

Nuclear pacifism

Answer 9

NUCLEAR PACIFISM: argues that it is morally wrong and unjustifiable for nations to create or hold nuclear weapons. Nuclear warfare is not justifiable because of the scale of possible destruction and the long-term health implications for survivors and future generations.

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) example of a pressure group that advocates pacifism. Advocates unilateral nuclear disarmament as well as non-proliferation. Can’t be justified because weapons do not discriminate between civilians and combatants.

Example: Bombings of Hiroshima at the end of the Second World War.

Nuclear warfare is incompatible with the principles of Just War. It creates an imbalance of power between nations. Other hand: those that argue deterrence.

Question 10

Arguments against pacifism

Answer 10

• Unlikely to become a national policy because it could make a nation vulnerable to attack.
• Pacifism is dependent on other nations also having a policy of pacifism.
• Pacifism in its absolute form is too idealistic: non-violence simply doesn’t work in the face of extreme evil.
• Not taking part in war, especially in self-defence, means to fail in an important moral obligation. Pacifism is arguably at odds with the concept of citizenship.