Sentences with phrase «pacifism in»

One who excercises pacifism in earnest would have been respected by these men.

Mad Mel returns to the director «s chair, preaching pacifism in a church whose walls are splashed with gore.

Nevertheless, I believe that the practical pacifism I have described deserves more serious consideration than it has received in Christian circles, especially since the major alternative to pacifism in Christian ethics, the just - war tradition, has significant deficiencies.

Practical pacifism deserves more serious consideration than it has received in Christian circles, especially since the major alternative to pacifism in Christian ethics, the just - war tradition, has significant deficiencies.

Recoiling remorsefully from the churches» all - out support of militarism and nationalism in World War I, many mainstream Protestants committed themselves, in varying degrees, to Christian pacifism in the «20s and «30s.

Like Tocqueville, he acknowledged that in many ways America was exceptional and that, marshaled to extraordinary power, our ideals had done and could do much good in the world; hence his criticism of Christian pacifism in the 1930s and defense of the Cold War in its early years.

Meanwhile, Protestant thought, influenced by the moral idealism and historical optimism of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, followed a similar course but moved closer and closer to a form of utopian pacifism in which war would be eliminated because of the increasing perfection of human social institutions.

When held to honestly, the just war tradition agrees with pacifism in rejecting these three views.

Don't mean to be provocative but I am catching a degree of pacifism in your words and tone.

< > Or Buddhists, or Hindus, or Shintos, or Yorumba, or Lakota... < > That's because there aren't a lot of Jews in Indonesia... and yes, throughout history when Christians have been attacked, there's been a back and forth between them and their attacker, ever since Christianity gave up on pacifism in the 3rd century and started skinning heretics alive (look up the story of Hypatia).

That's because there aren't a lot of Jews in Indonesia... and yes, throughout history when Christians have been attacked, there's been a back and forth between them and their attacker, ever since Christianity gave up on pacifism in the 3rd century and started skinning heretics alive (look up the story of Hypatia).

Not exact matches

That thinking — markedly boosted by the carnage of the Great War, which was sparked in Sarajevo by a 19 - year old Bosnian student assassin, not a capitalist — made Labor a honey - pot for all forms of pacifism.

In reply, pacifism insists that all war is evil — that it is hell, so we must stay the hell out of it.

This seems largely to be the work of the devil; but I also suspect that it is in part an effect of the existence of pacifism, as a doctrine which many people respect though they would not adopt it.

Several others point to Berry's lack of attention to the good of politics, especially what co-editor Nathan Schlueter calls «formal mediating institutions,» and Schlueter himself comes closer than anyone to an outright rebuke of Berry for his disregard of «the original sin narrative, with all that it implies» in his pacifism.»

The study is a critique of pacifism and pacifist organizations in recent agitations about war and peace.

The major Christian tradition has not been pacifism, in the sense of refusal to share in any war, but it has been a testimony for peace in the sense that war is seen as a necessary evil at best and never something in which to glory.

What could have benefitted me in those days was to have been asked, after having been shown Aron - style how the idea applied so poorly to specific historical examples, the following: «isn't there something in this idea that goes well beyond what pacifism itself logically demands?»

Back in the 1940's, when Reinhold Niebuhr started Christianity in Crisis to support the war against Nazism, he abandoned his earlier pacifism, and his earlier too - simply pious way of wishing evil away, and called for a new tough - minded Christian realism.

Personally, I do not think a true christian should actually be involved in politics as the requirements of office may lead one to have to work in opposition to one's faith — particularly the tough parts of the faith like forgiveness, pacifism, and love.

It is hard to see how a commitment to pacifism will ever be held by more than a small minority of Christians in the U.S., especially after the September 11 attacks.

A perusal of the Church of the Brethren Web pages provides clear evidence that a commitment to pacifism is not limited to denominational headquarters: the 48 churches of the Northern Indiana District Conference have joined to urge «the use of nonviolent approaches and interventions» in response to the terror; the Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania, Church of the Brethren has adopted a statement in which they «remain committed to walk in the Jesus way of nonviolent love, in which evil can only be overcome with redemptive acts of love»; a group of Brethren Volunteer Service Workers have issued a statement in which they «advocate the use of nonviolent means to settle disputes» and «stand opposed to the increased drive toward militarization»; on October 7 members of local Brethren churches (along with Mennonites and others) organized a peace rally at the state capitol in Harrisburg, «Sowing Seeds of Peace: Prayers and Petitions for Nonviolent Action,» which attracted over 300 people.

What the just war tradition is really good for is that together with pacifism it can identify and denounce the less restrained views which in fact dominate public discourse and decision - making.

All seemingly turned from God except Noah / God repents / and saves a core group to start over / trying to protect His children is a common theme in the OT / I don't know much of resistance or pacifism, but if you tried to harm my grandaughter I would probably respond with whatever it took.

As Johns sees it, such statements were not only unseemly in their haste — memos and family pictures from the World Trade Center towers were still drifting over Manhattan and we were ready to announce to the world what we would and would not do — but they grew out of an unattractive combination of national self - loathing and utopian pacifism.

In the same chapter, Hartshorne rejects dogmatic pacifism by arguing that the religious ideal of love as action from social awareness «seems clearly to include the refusal to provide the unsocial with a monopoly upon the use of coercion (MVG 173).

From belief in idealism or confidence in material progress to the questioning of pervasive ideologies of conflict, from militarism to pacifism, from empire to anticolonialism, or from multiculturalism to the supposed clash of civilizations, the Crusades have appeared as witnesses for all parties in some cosmic lawsuit with human nature in the dock.

Even if violence - employing radicals fail by not seeing the necessity of the corollary shared by pacifisms 1 and 2, do they not «have their hearts in the right place?»

He insists that the christologically disciplined account of nonviolence displayed in The Politics of Jesus can not be dismissed the way that liberal Protestant pacifism was.

The Leninist Theory, in which the blame for war is put upon a structure, a system, or a «Machine,» rejects the corollary shared by pacifisms 1 and 2 that insists upon the cultivation of personal peacefulness.

Since Barth was playing a large part in my dissertation I bought a mimeographed 47 - page pamphlet called Karl Barth and Christian Pacifism written by someone named J. H. Yoder.

Some of the readings are little gems: Justin Moser's 1772 warning about the dangers associated with «Diminished Disgrace of Whores and Their Children in Our day»; T. E. Hulme's «Essays on War» (1916), which respond to Bertrand Russell's arguments for pacifism; and Winston Churchill's «Speech on Rebuilding the House of Commons» (1943), a remarkable critique of «rationalism in politics» by a Burkean - minded statesman.

More egregious on the score of pacifism is this representation of God in the midst of a psalm celebrating victory in battle: «There you break flaming arrows, / shield and sword and war itself.»

I have been engaged in developing another paradigm for the ethics of peace and war besides that of pacifism and just war theory — just peacemaking.

One of the most interesting encounters of this sort happened one evening at a Mennonite church in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, where Myron Augsburger and I debated the issues of just war doctrine and pacifism.

«It should also be made quite clear that Gadhafi was no more of a Muslim leader than Slobodan Milosevic or Robert Mugabe should be considered to be Christian leaders,» said Arsalan Iftikhar, an international human rights lawyer and author of «Islamic Pacifism: Global Muslims in the Post-Osama Era.»

The book deals with the topics of war, pacifism, voting, protest, governments, murder versus killing (the 6th commandment), enlistment, military training, torture... all in the context of America's most recent wars.

The deepest tragedy of our age is the division between ideologies represented by Whitehead's national loyalty in World War I versus Russell's pacifism.

I'm sure many people would consider themselves pacifists but say that this is too extreme a definition, one might say for example that pacifism means «attempting to promote peace and making it a goal, but accepting that war is necessary in some cases to prevent greater evils,» however the way violence vs. following Jesus is being discussed in this context doesn't allow such concessions.

Such is the case whenever the topics of war and pacifism are brought up in the context of Jesus» teachings.

His academic colleagues at Union were taken aback by his brash, outspoken touting of socialism and pacifism when he joined the faculty, but they were even less ready when he attacked theological and political liberalism in this book.

At the beginning of World War II he developed the fullest argument in the American church against pacifism.

His political biography shows the nature of his alignments: social disillusionment with both capitalism and Marxism; embracement of pacifism, and then the abandonment of it during the rise of American isolationism and European fascism in the 1930s; the championing of U.S. intervention in World War II and a cold war stratagem to contain Soviet power; and indictment of the pretensions of American messianism and scientism when the U.S. first intervened militarily in Viet Nam under John F. Kennedy.

Neither is it soft pacifism to believe that a commitment to justice in the way we live and affect the world is part of the consideration of whether or not our military operations are to be judged «force» or «violence.»

Although Thomas and his brother Evan did not formally resign from the Presbyterian Church until their mother died in 1931, both referred to themselves as agnostics after their church failed to support their pacifism during World War I.

Anti-imperialism, pacifism and respect for all races were implicit in this teaching.

In the book's first chapter, «Why the Christian Church is not Pacifist,» he argued that «the failure of the Church to espouse pacifism is not apostasy, but is derived from an understanding of the Christian Gospel which refuses simply to equate the Gospel with the «law of love.»

The detailed pattern of my pacifism, therefore, has changed, like any empirical conviction, in the light of new data, mainly in the direction of pessimism for the immediate future.

I do agree, at least in part, with Mr. Bottum's distinction between «soft» and «hard» pacifism.

Reinhold Niebuhr, more and more convinced that the law of love can not be an absolute guide of conduct in social morality and politics, defected from the ranks of the FOR early in 1934 and became a kind of bête noire to pacifists — especially to those who claimed that pacifism was politically adequate.