Pacifism and Non-resistance

[Quahom1]

I think that girls especially need to be taught to be competitive. Self esteem comes from owning ability. Often girls aren't held to the same level of expectation in performance as boys. I was raised to be a pacifist but I want my kids to fight back. If someone picks a fight with them I want them hit back.

Chris

I believe, you want them to be in control of themselves, and their situation (be centered), thus keeping the aggressors off balance...?

 

[path_of_one]

I think that girls especially need to be taught to be competitive. Self esteem comes from owning ability.

I don't know if my personal experience agrees with this. I am not competitive with other people. I was taught to be competitive with my own best work- always striving for improvement. Growing out of this, I happened to be competitive with others since I was trying harder than most. But I was not looking 'round and sizing others up; I was taught to focus solely on my own best effort.

My self-esteem is pretty high and has nothing to do with my abilities. I was taught that every person has inherent worth and gifts, and my gifts mean I have a responsibility to use them in service to others. I was taught my abilities aren't mine. They are gifts from God. So they have little to do with my worth.

I think part of this is a perspective where I have a member of my family who is severely disabled. If people's self-esteem is based on owning abilities, what happens when they don't have any abilities that are competitive or viewed as noteworthy by society? Are they then worthless? It seems a dangerous road to rest children's sense of worth and esteem on ability rather than on the inherent worth of a human life.

A lot of girls who are extremely competitive, type A, and perfectionist become anorexic or bulemic in our society. Competition is not necessarily good for children or society.

To prevent laziness while still maintaining self-esteem as an attribute of inherent human worth, I was taught "to those who much has been given, much is expected." If I simply was competitive with other people around me, I'd do less and expect less of myself. But because I do what I do because I feel responsible to God for what I have been given, my level of accountability is higher and tend to work harder. Worldly success is an outgrowth of work I'm doing for another intent, and if it falls away, but I still know I've done my best for myself and for God, then my feeling of self-worth does not fall away with it.

Just some thoughts...

 

[Francis king]

hello...

I would be fine allowing my daughter to take up karate while making sure she is ethical, does not bully others, uses what she knows for primarily sport and self confidence building, and only secondarily for b) self protection/ protection of loved ones...

Non-violence is always the best action... so too walking away or running, instead of fighting... however, sometimes, fighting is your only option, and so it pays to be a confident and proficient fighter, yet at her age I can't imagine fighting to the death for family or honour or anything like that will be emphasised...

I don't think you can be an effective fighter and believe that violence or aggression is always wrong, though, but maybe that's just me...

 

[greymare]

better to be trained to defend oneself and never have to use it, than tonot be trained and to be found lacking at the wrong moment.

 

[lunamoth]

I hear what you are saying Chris, but I agree with Path of One about teaching girls to be confident, self-assured, and give them the support/access to skills they need to succeed, focusing more on being their best.

There are different flavors of 'competitive' I think.

 

[quakeyjase]

I'm re-reading Tolstoy's "The Kingdom of God is Within You" at the moment and he makes a strong case for Christian pacifism.

Even in a confrontational situation fight and flight are not the only options: you can stand your ground without giving in to violence and I learnt this only after having studied Aikido and Jujitsu. Hey, I wasn't always a Quaker!

Non-violence can be learnt by anyone you don't have to be another Christ or Gandhi.

 

[China Cat Sunflower]

I'm re-reading Tolstoy's "The Kingdom of God is Within You" at the moment and he makes a strong case for Christian pacifism.

Even in a confrontational situation fight and flight are not the only options: you can stand your ground without giving in to violence and I learnt this only after having studied Aikido and Jujitsu. Hey, I wasn't always a Quaker!

Non-violence can be learnt by anyone you don't have to be another Christ or Gandhi.

This is one reason I can't be a Christian. I really do think Jesus meant it when he said love your enemies and turn the other cheek. In fact I think it's central and indispensable to JC's philosophy. But I can't do it. I want physical safety. So, that and the fact that I don't believe in saviors kinda locks me out.

Chris

 

[Quahom1]

This is one reason I can't be a Christian. I really do think Jesus meant it when he said love your enemies and turn the other cheek. In fact I think it's central and indispensable to JC's philosophy. But I can't do it. I want physical safety. So, that and the fact that I don't believe in saviors kinda locks me out.

Chris

WTF, you just got done saying you think your children should stand up for themselves (e.g. your beliefs), and Christ tore apart the temple for his father's sake. You and Jesus are no different in mindset. Get that through your head.

you both want what is best, for those you love...

v/r

Joshua

 

[lunamoth]

This is one reason I can't be a Christian. I really do think Jesus meant it when he said love your enemies and turn the other cheek. In fact I think it's central and indispensable to JC's philosophy. But I can't do it. I want physical safety. So, that and the fact that I don't believe in saviors kinda locks me out.

Chris

I think I understand what you are saying Chris, but I don't think Christians are being hypocrits, or 'bad' Christians, when they still accept the idea of defending themselves in the moment, when there is no other recourse.

I think the key principles are 1. non-violence, 2. non-retaliation and 3. forgiveness. To turn the other cheek does mean to forgive, but not that you should keep putting yourself in the place where another can continue to abuse you. Maybe if it literally is someone slapping your cheek, and hurling insults, but Jesus did not die for us to no effect. There is no sense in us allowing ourselves to be killed to no effect.

Interesting that today's sermon was just on this topic. As nations, we have no mechanism in place to forgive...to retaliate, yes but to forgive, no.

quakeyjase, I also really like Tolstoy's TKOGIWY. His idea is that because any government at all requires authroity/threat of force to uphold laws, and can declare wars, that supporting any government, no matter how democratic, is in conflict with being a Christian.

 

[China Cat Sunflower]

I don't want to get into the "Christians are hypocrites" thing. Pacifism is a valid resistance strategy, but it requires that the bodies and lives of people be sacrificed to expose and shame the power structure. In that sense its purpose is to create a propaganda vehicle for the mythology of the resistance. Images of brutality against unarmed civilians destroy the legitimacy of the power structure in the eyes of the people at large. Whether the dead and injured are the result of fire hoses, attack dogs, rubber bullets, and truncheons, or of a suicide bomber, the net result in terms of the propaganda generated is very similar. Trippy isn't it? Terrorism and pacifism have a lot in common.

Chris

 

[China Cat Sunflower]

In response to Josh's remarks, you know...I've read the material pretty thoroughly, and Jesus seems to me to really be promoting the idea of maximizing the Kingdom though radical pacifism. There's a list of specific instructions about forgiving, going the extra mile, giving the coat off one's back if asked, loving enemies, etc. The Apostles are all venerated and glorified with martyr's deaths. They were honored to follow the Lord's example of willingly laying down one's life. There is an exceptionally detailed and macabre martyrology accompanying Christianity's tradition from earliest times to present, with stories of the deaths of the earliest Fathers, through the Huguenots and Waldenses, and into the present with missionaries killed in far away lands. Maybe I'm looking at this screwy, but it seems like the death of Jesus goes along with, and illustrates really, the resignation to God's will that informs his entire philosophy, as is especially demonstrated by the material surrounding the Beatitudes.

Chris

 

[quakeyjase]

This is one reason I can't be a Christian. I really do think Jesus meant it when he said love your enemies and turn the other cheek. In fact I think it's central and indispensable to JC's philosophy. But I can't do it. I want physical safety. So, that and the fact that I don't believe in saviors kinda locks me out.

Chris

I hear what you are saying. But there are degrees of non-resistance to evil and the truth of it is that it is a broader easier path than the general consensus would like to admit.

The adrenalin response has many times been described as fight or flight, but there is another option: freeze - and out of that peace can be born. (And out of peace comes the very Kingdom of God). It doesn't take superhuman courage to refine freeze into witness-for-peace - only a little step really.

Suppose you are confronted by a violent situation in which you see someone attacked and you freeze. With a little bit of courage un-freeze yourself by shifting your feet a little towards the confrontation. As you do this, the natural resistance to danger can be easily overcome. Show enough courage to move towards the danger a little at a time and more will be granted you.

When will peace begin, if not by your actions here and now?

Your aim is to neutralize the violence and you can do this by coming between the antagonist and the victim. This is Russell's famous "interpose myself". You might like to pray for both parties and doing so grants you the moral authority to neutralize the attack.

If you are really serious about neutralizing the violence, then it is true that you must be prepared to suffer injury or death. But there are "get-outs" available if you are not ready to make that sacrifice. Pray on it.

If violence is still threatened you can make creative use of body language to further neutralize the confrontation. A tried and tested defensive posture is the "prayer stance": facing the attacker you put your hands together as if to pray whilst focussing your sight on the attacker's chest, avoiding eye contact. You are now in a position to reason with the attacker, whilst also having "inner control" of your relative positions.

If you fail in neutralizing the attack you are in a strong position to repel the attacker if you have no option but this is not the primary aim. Your aim is to communicate to the attacker that while you don't want to see the victim hurt neither do you want to see the attacker having to carry the burden of that hurt.

If your faith is strong enough you may be able to put your trust in God to turn your back to the attacker and facing the victim, reason out with the victim any aggravating factors, for example if the victim precipitated the attack by some means, although this will not always be the case.

None of this is impossible I have successfully applied it without very great injury. Follow this and you will see the power of Christ's teaching before your eyes and it will amaze you!

qj