Quaker Religious Thought
Volume 11 Article 2
1-1-1964
The Peace Testimony: Does Christian Commitment Make a Difference?
T Vail Palmer, Jr.
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/qrt
Part of the Christianity Commons
Recommended Citation Palmer, Jr., T Vail (1964) "The Peace Testimony: Does Christian Commitment Make a Difference?," Quaker Religious Thought: Vol. 11 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/qrt/vol11/iss1/2
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Quaker Religious Thought by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected].
with
nothing
the demption
but
views
therefore in
ways
tian
execute
powers
social
bear
fused
hope, justice,
society;
are
too.
area will
cause
dignity? an
anity
cial
has
Commitment
The
the
tasks
opiate
revcrsed
natural
been,
as
Roman
The change
—
the
The
that
his
of
on
and
and
give
order
and
their
citizen
Christian
Peace
that on
what
wrath
social
to
Romans
of
cross
Catholic
they
arguments
are
relationship
Or
and
and
of
which
confounded
political
do
charity.
the
government
religion
of have
Catholics
virtues
be
his
Christians
is
the
forbidden
cannot
concern?
in
or
with
upon
is,
are
redemption.
only
social
are
conclusions:
Testimony:
and
people,
humble
as
all
13 a
argued
ethics
Make
guided
problem.
ordained
this
life
have
ruler,
such
and
sure
or
Luther
him
rational
action
take Jew,
developed
of
nature
add
to
lack
and
should
separation
based
Christian
the
a
been
long
foundation
that
Christian
as
in
him
any
theist
by
hindrance
are
a
something
social
was
orders
The
courage, of
Christians
beings
the
of
Lovers
going
9 doeth
with
the
part
and
as
on
Dii7ere;:ce?
be
the
it
Does
God,” a
and
convinced
order
Anabaptists
an
makes
doctrine
cot
human
change. ethics
guided
of supernatural
of
grace;
love
in
one
T.
can
oti
individual
evil”;
of
to
humanist
to
temperance,
creation
Church
the
in
ntnlent
and
of
in
VAIL
live
men
unite
another:
progress?
C’hristian the
in
little
of
which
creation,
the
the
order
by
reason:
of
therefore
private
bear
Calvin
that
in
coiscern
nol-resisting
and
natural
accepted
Romans
Christian
and
Christian
and
and
difference
the
— PALMER,
to
and
all
virtues
of
this
the
planners
Is
can
social
scripture,
wisdom,
build
Does
redemption,
would men
order life,
society,
creation, must
churchman
Christianity
for
the
sword
law:
view
unite,
Lutl’er’s
13:
of
Church,
but
of
concern
Christi
should
a
human
act
Chris in
of
love:
faith,
have
of
there
good
good
“the
con
nor
and
“to
re
hi JR
the
be
as
in
in
so
a
1 p
1
God’s
ments,
Old
life
DLVFLO1’MEl
the
refused
an
even
spirit
with
But
overnrnefltal
George
stables
hat
led
example
ltrticularly
sical
called
victions
In
from
ou1d
light
they
gainst
both
the
order
and
problem
Early
and
to
this
The
which
they
to revelation,
the
kingdoms
of
statement
is
did
scripture.
of
undertake
Declciatiofl
to
Truth, We
and
Viny that
world. 3
kingdom to
in
not
Fox
rebellion!
New
the
of
Christ
a
remarkable
may
about
origin
scriptural
this
Friends
action
reduce
society.
continued
sufficient
not
creation
do
is
man
to
participate
of
Ten
the clearly
encouraged
Testaments,
just,
be
historical
action
will
certainly
THROUGH
Christian
“double
quote
called
of
the
of
and
is
spiril
“for
set
of
with
a Christian
They
Commandme1t5.
made
this
true, an
never
the
of
in
guidance
“holy
or
The
guide
Christ, commands
up
history
document as
to
the
RomanS
1660, them
unbroken
the
world.”
to
of
outward
early
were,
your
know,
in
situation,
to
a
and
their
Friends
see commitment
saute move
the
kingdom
experiment”
Christ,
OLAKER
live
case
summed
for
the
rebellion,
ethics
nor
in
to
of
righteous”;
participation
Quaker
natural
of
diligence
indeed,
Christian
and
own
nations.” 2
which
option
absolute
of
Christian
us
13,
the
of
Friends
the
weapons,
for
unity;
in
which
the
it
in
to
suffering,
the
so
HISTORY
Quaker
of
up
distinctive
spirit
They
Barbadoes
is
the
fight
society
virtues
not
peace
Friends
trying
peace
and
testify
Christ”
in
especially
in in
classical
in
the
perfection,
demonstrated
kingdoms conduct
leads
William
commandmcnts
certain
international
goveri1me1t
by
and
your
neither
the
social
proclaimed
in
position
moral
testimony.
testimony
to
of
to
to
non-resisting
extensive
proclaimed:
war
and Ten
us social
rational
contribution
explain the
to
the
offices,
Christian
concern.
notewortilyat
in
circumstances.
into
Penn
law
serve
for
against
of
to
world,
in
demands
Command
can
individual
and
action
this
harmony
is
the The
their in
that
in
“that
all
argument
why
man
war.
felt
be
as
the
They
applied both
doing
text
love.
even
con
seen
clas
the
cal
they con
to
or
of
“for
an
so-
In a been of purity the concern ence withdi dcc. of Policy. consequence lutionarv concerji testimony
events government,
chief
ftIcii
from
put as steadily (lecision-nmaking ucimic. Se problems are tianizing” monopoly but These returim biIit world’s Christian
penetrate least, main actis The0 a then bilit tian being
oiidcilying First, aw
Of
inual
sininle for
follows:
can
oiidlv, Robert
iii
in
tb expressed also
historic
these ieal,
e as
resnonsibilities
ia the
set
ni
anti
a international from
of
principles came be of to l’rtend’
affairs particination i,
and of to
Qilaker a
closer
affairs.
hastio
in
the
in a
on Quietist lack remind at
found way denounced
principles sin,
policies as an sense
of Christian Byrd and
in
[omeign
more
the
publ:c
political and home
causes
trends the the
relevant
Christianity’
Friends
emphasis the not
of
to
and
of
working
witness. from
of
which primary shows
in
process political Finally, the
Christiai Quietist
involvement Christianity,
Coijie
Initially those relating
life
and shell,
only
responsibility; Into responsibility
policy,
tried Robert.
and
relations.
in
might remedy
problems in
principles
which, and
A material
of have
abroad, hos’
the
the
to in in on
out Finally
effect
forces public with
‘I
dimmer
to
there
interest plane. the reaction,
Christian
be and authority the attitude lenounced the
Byrd’s
forces
go
the Friends
hey the
convert
of
Friends faced
was
In
in Society
seen,
a
at Friends’
c:ause themselves to social forth lives
inherent has at
as
for immediate has earliest
affairs
corresponding-
Robert has
to toward
the God’s in
to
view their
of
Quaker
has plincif)les work
thc
in with
been a however
conic
e order peace withdraw even of
public
was commitment evil of to
centres
and too
of
JusLory
war public
been
remedy own been of
in indiviclimis
social, Friends,
good control their
Byrd’s
in the
in
Friends an
seen
a could
began a economic
the
time
Ways
to
order
in
testimony
as applica
gradual gradual
interna faith “Chris
specific
eventual draw-n poli
of
which iii
policy maintain as
Chris
ruling of
such possi
time,
to sin
from
eco then own
increase
the
not
tile
in
no time with
to
he the and
at to y.
to
and
Foreign
emerg words,
course
heads
Social
peace
have pra.
revo
total
the
the
in
j
f r fr
for these tween
tends for sizing Quaker
But
clined trend, in stated have ‘prophets’ its
of perience
prophetic
Christian sent Friends
ally to
any
instance:
some
order There
attempts
beliese
he
Robert historical
mattel-s
liegotiat and to agents cies
tend stand
missionary only
created, Christian
have ity,
to will been tives.
ing most
as s to
analysis,
study concerns
fails
overemphasize
fundamental
replace
modulate most the well,
to have
relief antI
are
questions or
either
and
accurately one
Christian faith
that come
their apt . willing,
to of
gain to
Byrd
.
policies ion as
opposing of
points .
on
belief. in
been deeply trends l3reseit
There express ‘reconcilers’, Public
side
to
work, improving
the commitment there
for the zeal;
and discussions
to religious and closer
a
occasion, immediate
gain
also
the
divergent
peace be
peace,
at
of
in of problems at
faith, Friends
reflect
their
experience. shifts communication,
falls is and, are
concerned policy
more
Early the times, and frankly the the
results
fails contemporary which accord
tactics to
some
testimony
in
insights
the
evidence since the
peace particular singleness
short; and ultimately,
apply
serious
in
and
radical their
to on
have
results.
Quakers at
and the to direction,
Robert
evidence rather
involved with
threshold the
channels non-Christian and
take
the attempted
points
appeal
the
5 the
testimony
for
the Society own
and
advocated Quaker nature
to
The
difficulties
implications implementation
what
level that
is
Quietist
account differences
than
the of peace policy
Byrd’s reqUire developments.
In
based proclaimed reasons
by in
these
where
that
in a in
of
the contemporary
of
there
of Friends of of terms
peace recoHstruction
trend
serving
in
terms social
to international
was the
political
testimony.
Friends
at Quaker broad
direction
Friends helpful Ofl
for are period,
in of terms
spread of
such for
has
for
issue.5 relationship
a
between
which ethical of their the
of testimony
years
them.4
crucial
that corollary
concern.
under
as
the
favour been
a
pacifist
which a objec
poli
implications have religious real tend analysis
He by
radical the
today
it
frequently-
theology
are
Society taken
is
American principles
with a empha
the writes, points
less
strong
of ethics
gener
both
He be
by
two of and
this
in
icr-
ex
in
or
action view
of into
or
armed
characteristic,
the
war,
direct
force Friend
men
respective
the
strip
ence’
or
acteristic,
of
his
ierstiasion
ticular war,
The
task
ternational
I’RO!’I-IFJ original
more
‘prophet’
pletely
missionary
is
that
the
procedures
leading
rival
on
to
immorality own
There
nature
tarians
Leningrad cliscontmuity
Let
as
to
and
and
‘reconciler’
as
or
in
the
raise
action
a
campaign
defense.
unu
who
question,
widely
be
separable
a
states
trip
some
as
point
Quaker
us
that
that
keystone
he
contemporary
and
countries.
that
a
VS.
are
ersal
is
a
clean
who
and
sees
activity
dispute.
turn
peace
to
is
is
weighty
international
he
for
Iris
a
to
RECONCtISER
and
his
of
the
the likely of the
and
Moscow
harboi-
He his
in
effectiveness
may
is,
Contemporary
into
than
of
mutual
emphasis.
is
Our
view,
from
primary
bringing
organizing
of
primary
most
march,
as most
of
a
‘reconciler’
most
briefly,
zealously
likely suicidal
a
is
He
this
large
to
thoroughly
some
national
The the
attention
question
seminar
the
consequently
peace
about
or
hopeful
be
or
hopeful
feels
urgent
trend
understanding.
conciliation position
to
task
or
the
metropolitan
found together
Peking,
‘prophet’,
task
the
Christian
day
‘hot
IODAV
nature
be
attempts
education
volunteers
cranking
of
that
the
policy.
Johnston
6 for is
in
al)OUt
Friend
is
Quaker first
be
is task
spot’
ways
found
way
the
known
to
in
rights
essentially
the
to with
negotiation,
younger
or
of
key
help
the
a
to
to
either
of
non-violent
of
such
on
show,
process.
serving faith,
the Robert
Quaker
to
Society
who
out He
in
be
opposing
and
decision-makers
solving
the
that
solving
and
area.
as
mythology in He
Island
bring
make
the
dependence
a
that
as
feels
possible.
a
diplomats
a undesirable
sees
tension
by
action.
protest
tries
wrongs
and
of
other
mimeographed
Berlin
a
as
many-sided
Byrd’s
team
of
At
of
the
his
conflicts
dramatic conciliation,
conflicts
bomb-test
that
earl’
‘‘return”
his
a
sides
not
demonstrating
alternative
Friends
that
his
own
Quaker
policy-makers
hand, To
at
At
between
ship
most
or
on
that non-violent
asslimptiol:
most
Quakerisnt
to
on
or
the
in
Christian
his the
recognize
point
any
in
short
or
short
intrude
action,
sailing
any
parlia
armed
urgent
being
to
is
peace
U.
today.
zone,
most
‘pres
Gaza
their
char
Com
par
and
the
set
the
the
N.
in
ot
to
of
of
I
shift
either
ament,
ing
are
their
unprophetic
proach.
not
philosophy
and
and
what
differences
pacifist’
fist
questions
mittee.
1935
rent
Union,
Powel,
‘,,ent,
nosals
the
disputes
improving
to
policy
national
merit,
lateral
Codiditions
tion
principles
out
needed,
situpi
Power
positions
it
consistently
The
radical
need
our
a
the
by
international
and
that
is
of
are
‘prophet’
The
“in as
and
as Steps
is
There
ated.
The
action
working
not
other
difference
terminology
among
the
for
of
defense;
a
non-violence,
good
in
negotiating
an
and
puts
the
one
the
the
of pacifist
and
first
for
persuasive the
international
peace
possible
dilficult)
philosophy
each
can to
.
alternative
negotiation
is
in
two
atmosphere
is
that if
.
last
of
statements
its without
their
‘prophet’
Peace, or-
the
three nonreCOnciling
.
parties
trying
social
no
agreement
be
other
it
concerns
problems.
teinperanlent.
between
a
position.
types
emphasis
The
analysis
‘prophet’
major
suggests
cOntrCveeSy
typically
for
reConCilerb
and,
full
of
with
for
and
if
respectively,
analysis
to
and
for
and
these,
to
test
compleme1t
either
to
as
perhaps
relations
describe
and
achieve.
are
powers
world-wide
of
in
this
of
some
Toward
the
the
a
The
a
hence
dependence
social
could
of
on
and
a
the
that,
‘The
the
pacifist
suggested:
‘ra(liCal
seen
The
effective
liberal
liberal
to
appeal
American
are
successful
7
criticisms
proposing
is
which
first
extent
United
to
Society
‘reconciler’
Fundamental
slightly
carry
analysis
the
desist
simply
not
in
prepared
final
United
involved
in
The
are
Security
mediation
each
three
policy
order
pacifist’.
disarmament,
pacifist
pacifist
‘reconciler’
the
is
be
exercise.
seen
cannot
getting
out
study,
consideration
from
Nations.
on
of
that
Friends
negotiation
a
muted,
of
States
will
other
achieved.” 7
series
non-violent
emphasize
Friends,
matter
to in
armed his
as
would Throngh
between
should
each
and
the
their
approach
and
he
these
requiring Speak
achies
be
in
job
differences
and
in
of
The
dilierCWe
Service
exposition
helped
as
radical
Speak
negoti
other’s
of
the
conciliation,
violence
require
sometimes
the
studies
that
effectively
recognize
submitting
positions,
a
the
e
1949
temper
is
such
Tnt/h Disarina
of
following
way
national
‘liberal
disarma
Negotia
carry
to
a
both
Soviet
certain
these
Truth if
Com
paci
ap
and
pro
cur
we
uni
in
on of
is
for
of to
led
own ministers
ment
fist
greater
faith
such
indicates,
tion,
THE
assumptions
sis AFSC
writings
erally
otumenclect
“The
committed
could
ment
compromise,
we
ferences
would
timate
text more
“it
effective Non-violence,
on
others
should
The
have
environment
in
LIIlER-L
demands
remedies
.
There
within
negotiation.
. for
presence
which
studies
corn-age
recognized
become understanding-
.
human be
objecti
recognizing
inelv gain
ible
ut
that
of
by
who
liberal
accepted
reaching action,
an
of
>rkablc
relevant.
work
and
as
individuals,
is
means
behind
which
attitude
diflerent
in
our
they
and
increase
and
P\CtFIS1:
do
belonging
can
sonic
for
greater
than”
ability
national
Cs
including-
of
advantage.
growing
pacifist,
for
hopes
has,
and
not
deeply
agreenient[,
of
base
as
vigorous,
international
see
the
decisions.”°
the
of
the
Such
the
that
suggestion the
...
Negotiation
a
essential
probe
free
understand
of
to
background military
on
beyond
in
use
pronosals
principle
their
more
discipline,
for
proposals
TETE
if
policy
American
to
labor
felt
as
an
the
pacifist
opposite
non-cooperation
the
processes
mutual
discussion,
we
.
peace
of
the
we
pioneering
much
proposals.
open
minds
RECONCILER
mature
other
n]ot
are
recognized
to
S
through
Negotiation
the
violence.
in
nature
Non-violence,
by
have
conflict
for
that
minority;
must
is
)1-ivacy.’
a
of
the
these
to
understanding:
to
further
interests
people:
mind
niore
first
thought
the
of
suggested
healthy
require,
hand,
liberal
negotiations
seen,
gain
approach
understanding,
diplomacy,
men
thinking
of
other
be
We
the
minorities
individual
sI;uclies being
.
as
the
arduous
founded.’’’ procedures a
.
into
and
its
tends
obstacles “In
can
requires
need
this
and
mediation,
framework
mar
democracy.” 11
persistence
better
men
democratic
as
on
in
own
the
the
of process
resolve
good
the
the
radical
approach
Jack
the
to terms
to
or
he
“with
and
has
the
program
nations
training,
United
grasp
prerequisites:
examine
social
problem
“It
non-violence
recommend a
of
other
gen
honourable
ivill
The
of
social
Powelson
been flex
a
disagree
of
that
their
of concilia
is
foreign
process:
greater
it
govern
of
the
analy
is
for
their
paci hand,
in
States
The
gen
has of
rec con
the
the
and
dif
in
ul
a
its
a
I
}
a
sonal and
1-larrop
tions
The pation
to
is
ert ened
national
also
Samuel
courts
ships counteract
cather
tion
whole
as
to
ciple
ships
tional
of
especially
important
text,
Ilict
is
handle
resolved means different
including
a
the
having
Byrd
gmermlment
the
protect
the
But
relationship
I)oes
that
essential
The
United
which
contact
to
to
in
liberal
“One
with of
and
in
law,”
than
anti
control commuflity.”
action
Levering
the
be
the most
settling
or
claims
universal
it.”’
this
negotiating.
liberal
this
been
by manlier.” 3
enforcement” t ’
clearly
activity
individuals.
world
the
the the limited,
want Ruth
of
regularized
point
to
Nations,
paciSt,
with
ingredient
organization
liberal
that
“reconciliation,.
of
concern
of the
social
in
on
results
that
community.
liberal
By
between
conflicts?
pacifist
the
violence,
community
Freeman
insists
community
controlling
b)
where
his
such
is,
great
accountability
of
in
procedural
“Friends
is
pacifists
diplomat
groups:
for
on
government
Kenneth
opp
The
of
The
dialogue,
Ro-bert
its
pacifist
for
aspects
processes
organizational
for
that
world
those
procedural
understanding
individual
arbitration
at
sphere
must
or
as
Samuel
site
‘building
..
emphasis
price
improving
the
do
international
also
have
more “Police
world
requires
.
“the
.
aspects
of
as
Byrd
Boulcling.
law number.
emphasis
.
institutions,
be
9
conversation;
international
Nor
“want,
through
international
comprornise
of
of
of an
as
work
Levering
felt
machinery
based
generally
or
community;
persons.
institutpS
conflict
application,
individuals
community
sees
individual,
and
arrest
the
is
do
of
organizational
world
riot
problems
international
actively
of
on
and
law
police
on
The on
institutions
the
which
legal
conflict
He
only
the
individual
the
considers
control.
government.
must
Kenneth
law.”
involving
personal
the
and
level.
Quaker
..
of
goal
law
defines
nature
action.
understanding
for
are
fight .
that
before
is
and
in
conflict
of
to
control
peace
conversation
[or
is
get,
as
IitgUe.”
direct
mankind.
a is
adequate
individuals
In
spelled
form,
those
the
relations,
Similarly,
“the
police
of
strength’
against
seen
enrpliasis
ielation
the violators
Boulcling and
relation
partici
award,”°
this
interna
is
We
may
peace’
of
inter
Rob
per
prim
law,
most
na
but
role
by
con-
con
out
ac
can
be
to a s’iclual as liberal a viduals The
personal
in it He
primarily of zens, suggesis government public conversaLion: changes Processes sa i su( those ing
he
vely.
personal
a
is
individuals. a
It
does
We
world that, texture process
essentially How
democracy.”’
and as
imate ccnsent conversations a’ who gin trail It all.22 new another gmuLluall) oneime5 pacifist’s firmly
until
conversation
are
e negotiatioi see
in demonstrations
that is
iu
can
between
coming change
gOverliflient to does
reads’,
has
forms the
]‘oreign level
of that of now general,
are satisfaction
the
when practice
the take
roust “Adequate
social ot relationships
been
the iiittie
social and
the
social the
increasing
greater ready
the of mankind of
while process
about
citizens
place
role
policy it
be
Robert and well which
liberal channels attitude. which then awareness change, the
fundamental
of the takes
analysis.
groups
expected
to
to
of
of of
Overrmienu mediation. part prii liberal marked more
througl
future
of be still con1municatioi which
grasp
giving and
are a the is
awareness
place is
Byrd
between Pacifist
ate
then,
better a social
held
of through can 10
so
regularly,
more essential complex populatioj their
becomes
Pacifist
gi-oujs He
to the
the and now,
he
essential
specific
in similarly
play
contacts
is
social
to
follow’
change way,
The
sees advocates? expect
goverurne1t, one fundanientai one population
individuals,
charted individuals
be and
based which or
a
sees
that of
to
role
society, and of characteristic established dependably individual, Institutions form
as
only practice
to between
as processes
between
sees
conflict
is contagion,
to
governnient,
500n
they
in on to these
of a
the
essentiall
the to
bring
whole.23 when
social
this the
educating
Phillips
has
at
popular
It
constiultes
this as can foreign until
thrust
social
of interpersonal
resoluto
pm-ox
every private process, is individuals: favorable
most
they then undergone
of
and the about
be awareness the change
of
the
of
a law
group,
Ruopp of giving- one includ
Policy
level,
effect
mdi
indi
the Citi but and
the the
as of
to
A
r
whether rate collection
by and Byrd
based primary Kenneth a Ne short,
an individuals moore,
role ior therefore, own same
neth flict; in classical’ cc-anouiic essential graphs su:options,
a action many
“In
group,
exercising
general
organization lree(lom
of reality his
that
takes
being
behalf
any
(leclopmei1( In Boulding encourage the on to
whether I his it discrete is
ietv
lie
of approach national
of ndamen
social
describing
acts but or the composed
is Boulding’s
the case, successors spiritual
independence
approach time
the these ‘‘The
universe junction of that
theory those
who relevant
aggregation
or of
it a
most
it
like
concept
latter its
agent.
complex action,
totalitarian these
is a we has the
rally part
units. admits,
as its make fundamental
state person
things
own
to possible a
of profound
growth
are of in “a a individuals of
citizens as
to pure position ut
interrelationships to spin of
the to analysis,
conflict
clear
separable
A individuals, oF quantitative an structure individuals,
it or Adam or
He governnent,
considering
a
economics factors
furthermore, the
whi(:h of
of acting
behavior
tual. theory up,
a
person’s
aggregate individual.
attains
local of
to control realizes boundary,
individuals.
one “party” to
organization.”2’ insights
when
is particularly
individuals,
Smith,
derive
principle It somewhat
express
pcrverh
of
in making
an
another. from of 11 of interest-group,
is
such
social behavior an unit
that to which is oversimplification, to and he units
terms international
an of
or
they for
an mathematical
organizational to basically and eliminate aid that
and states: are An individual
may “behavior
individual the a stunt, up
its of
approach
an Friends,
behavior, It
more that
and in the the can threatens separate
is likely Starting
organization, of
behavior live
use action the
either
and
“economic be
the
considered
In any
effects leaders;
attain.’ and are to
of
an according that group. sophisticated,
from is
poential spiritual
to
actual aid
and is
such firms, oilier unit’’25
called has which is
individual retard but acting primarily
reality
be from
formulas the
role.”27 thus is of
of
that and
So
leaving he
other of no
. models much
he
the . the dignity Robert acting as practice, unit;
further
. roles,
a such sees
defines as
of behav sepa on
bias”’ only affirms,
capa
second
inter
Ken ‘neo
the con
the
and the a
or his the in
out is
for
as
in
a necessai-y. and groups. non-violent THE as sequent substantial sion gToups
missing theory other ysis.
its analogous of terms (lescribed of Kenneth
alysis. concept structure order
order •-
a
function
“competitive production
We
to The primary
RADICAL
The
of
The
liberal
of
models.”29 of
reach and able are in gree 1 national suggest and
This
roug-h
lack
The
have from
of On hurnam
the
magnitude Boulding
A.
liberal
can fundamental pi-imarily
harmony
its
economic ‘balance
also to
of
‘power.
to
alternatives
to to
J. of
these i°
factor
ultimate
noted
“loss-of-strength pacifists. through
Kenneth
failure
say. take individuals
L’AC[FJST:
‘‘speak
that the
which i\fuste any
of
forth
to
relations,
pacifist
power”31
society,
issues
that
economic cost polItics’
more
in serious
does such
that operates
in
with
of
and
concept
to in
form
has to
the
the
to
quantitative
l3oulding’s
of
of
power’
weaknesses
THE analysis
human take
the
to the than
that admit
alternatives
do
in the the that
stated
transportation God
interaction, against
God-within
grappling
when
of
as
armed
radical
radical their
1-lot
from
firms,
into
of
PROPHET
of gradient,”3 one
power
God-Spirit.
12 a
interdependent
of in
that concept
relations,
fundamental God’
of this
‘countervailing affect
individuals
others;
acts
form.
each God analysis,
account
within,
the violence
units,
pacifist
and
pacifist of
social
as
in
with
be
at and
in is
role
the
dramatically
other, society liberal within
adopted
in
in expressed
various allowed
Robert WI-len others.3°
comparable
which
including
the
behavior,
and
units usefulness the
as This
of
tends economic
has
political
as
factor
are
from problem power
but
is corporate
reality
people
themselves
pacifism’s
national in
something
po’er’
is exercise levels, Byrd
po’er
a unilaterally,
to
to
able
the
this moral
analogous
primarily
that
recommend
in
as and
inter
move in
theory
of
price
to
rejects
are
of
de of possible:
social
the of
power
to
and
iS
of the
the
its
dimen policy,
a
power:
power
social
social
social
more
social
most anal
fonn
con
first-
cost
the are
an the
in in
if
is
1’
ii 4
a
pacifist
James tess
Gandhian aflnv. he
in
and
ively Tnent ment:
weapons n note
on that
resistance iveness -
scheme proitle
frustrate Muste
context,
pacifist
he the approach.
Euhord -
with
proposing
prepared
of
the
More
reduction
advocates?
the
the radical
way
are Anyone Does
Bristol
what
‘Unilateral
proposals
If immorality
fronted suggests
professed, will, Christian a would and but
nor real
radical
nation
of
power
when
emphasis
can
ways
Sibley,
commnitment
he the
recently,
Stamin
type
is
the
believe
organized
power
the to other
power
reconciliation
a emphasis
hopes
Mulford
any insists,
aggression whO
know
of program
presented
of he take
of
with
radical pacifist “would
which
a
gates
There
and
I-or for
international
seeking
states: nation deepening
taking
longer
nations non-violent
initiatives on
becomes
of
advocates
radical
they —
to
this
they
the
unil:uerai instani
‘‘Fle
the war
of
tile j’’-ls’er
effect
Sibley can
would nonviolent
to
is
does
pacifist
disarm
of
last
would
hell
truly
should
the likely
provide.”35
were
Russian
a
actually
as
potential
organized
and
unilateral
might
he
pacifists
and
ultimate
more even
e,
seem
the step.”34
of
against and
unilateral
could way indicates:
the
deter
seen,
revolutionary writes,
violence. resistance
unilaterally
in
be
differ
tensions. to disarm
self-sacrifice
the
changes
13
it
more
be
effective
to eventually
the
make
of impressed.
PeoPle
resistance alternative
practicing
actually
as
effectiveness
prevail.37 have a
meaning
non-violent be
move initiatives willing
oaiimen which
the
from
presence would-be
‘‘Tue
In
in
marked
some
disarmament
This along
in
to joined
Mulford
Cross this
Even
were
defense
would —
L
national the —.
neither
aggression take
major
spectacle
to
unilateral
of are similarity
would emphasis
at
with
the
statement
I
when
of
to . for
to — liberal here, do.”33 aggressor
think power
of
once .
liberal
action.
place.”6 generally
power I
have
of
Sibley’s ti-lan
faith
be
armed disarmament
his his
purpose
cannot
Russia
policy
be
non-violent
good flow’ — a
con
of
they
insistence
proposals
on
in
and
pacifist
Radical
in
clisarnia
distinct to
military
pacifists
regard
— to we
it
a
Thus,
and
such
general
effect
must
state be
force.
A.
which tied
help
of
tyr
Can
a
to
J. a
imm
a
HIII analysis of such in ways its
creasing proach This “involvjno”
must changing power sive to process we pel’suasive.”9 pected, bandwagon persuasion; eventual Cecil
persuasion national
Cecil
intentiomi
As can
The
o’-’h! The resistance.’’
a both
emphasis
organize
Hinshaw
such
ii operation into ornanization resl)ous:b:liLy
of may ii of political from
of
might liroug-h of
of ing
however, see
the
Hinshaw,
eventual
corollary likelihood persuasion the public
snch be
can of
persuasion p:rc’iu
the
a
defense
be of organizational he persons a movement
effectiveness
cisc5
persuading
working
eaibocliecl necessity
and
“the Even
difference
grow the
be themselves nature pce for
expects
on
aho ptmhhc
force 0
policy of
only
organized
nation expected,
objective, Mulforcl the
one
om-g-anization
of
victory
policy, accustomed
in of
the emphasizes and,
in
that inunedli in
educators
at exemplifies
o:ik
anti
this
of
for new spea
the
those if
develops. “a
active
is
[lie
in progvamn
the them
in
of
man Since
the
to
“there
iadic:al
time for
that
effective recognition
context king
as effectiveness.
a
attitude a
Sibley
emphasis. their shaping-
(probably
this
polls.” action
who the
within
[ely logic in;t
political Cecil
work
effective
14
in of
man3-
as
those of
to
the
and
can
policy
comes
radical the society the chan’e. commitment
Robert theceafter This
resting slow share
likewise articulating
of
group. and
is I-Iinshaw
importance for iiiiitoiav
to
of writ
the
clearly
of who pacifist
“power
these
that
after of suowball.”
program,’’ action.
growth
public kind
and peace
For
its evidence
a
these lug,
nation, is
pacifist’s Pickus,
the upqn
advocate
time But
the members emphasizes
quite
Both
statements,
the Cecil
requires
be
of
initial position
the
insists, of
h
place is
coilvictirsas
policy.”4’
to at proposed their
result of Thus, his
when successful seen ((al
the us
one
of
tendency who
the of
different
it. first,”
HirisIaw, which
the
fundamental
minor—
is
non-violence
of this logic
defeats)
the
“ultimately views
come .ncecl
of
win-
in
[sic]
anti
can insist
the a
process according
here
power
however,
with the
cause kind
the
proce,s
change
has
of
be of
from
that best “the
pas
this
ap
in the
ex
of as
in
of
of
is
Al
1
that contained rejects
umclnidtialist
teptioll power human He order will thority
itregate
plains up alit3’ in
Cecil
operation and contribution upon existence
power
Mulford forms; the not 12-c-sted such voluntary th
which
the
further
The
be of
The groups
of centrality
and
social
there
Hinshaw’s
types one
the
rather makes largely and another the It
and authority
individual. the diffused.”45 of
it the in of
by
radical
the is
atoms Sibley
cannot radical means corporateness
man
of
society aspect atom view
real
Charles suffel-ing
same ic. sees liberal instruments power
this will
authority
at
of
social
power
of
a
than keeps
atomnistic:
all
of
pmver, and
is,
istic
collection
“assumes cenien pacifist never
the power the
be
“that
are to
nature. analysis be
of
pacifist
levels.
pover
is
nit
of
pacifist.
group Walker:
atomistic influence, There
society all
defined radical as
this
to need
individuals limited. for
his
noncooperation
the
t
among
touching
a human
operative
kinds
for
limit that denial
of at
conception.
others.”’9 There
insistence balance:
factor
for
the A. of is
is
contrary,
for
of is
desire
the
together exercising
pacifist
simply
hghly
the
“Nonviolent J. A.
one
a political In makes
inevitability
individuals.46 people
his to of
attention
social of
living
Muste core beings
are in
15
any each
J. sole
does impress
associations
in
for
form the
possible
the
Muste,
as
many that
to
Mulford
aware
a
at of
The good laws non-violent
effective
social
a theory
tension groups: other;
the affirms: it. piofouncily
society. not
the
with relations
are
any
radical
of
society,
power
to
oneself
religious
types
direct
ability Authority
of society workable,
analysis
power
imply of
for
choices.”47
thought time.
approval
the
the
of
it
power
Sibley
between each
agent,
“The the
pacifist is instance,
society “All
of
But
exists
between
a distribution
moral action
in action,
to
or
a
an
in
social
io’.’ This
nation, existence
of
pacifist with
relations various
coerce.
collectivism indicates mere
all o[
democratic
and swallowing
society organs
extremely that that
the
in
er.’
inclividu as
A thought.
power
as combines is
pow’er
one.’’44
are its
persons firmly
power various an
role
fact
major
con self-
Thus
ways
‘Iwo
au
and
ag
and ex sug
of of
the
of of
of
is TYPE OF APPROACH hr wee of the goal or objective of action in determining A THIRD the type of power that is brought into play: We need to note the further point that both liberal and radical pacifism include in their numbers Friends who consider (OlC ki fld ol. power is nOt appropriate or effica more uuivecs cotis for all ohect’ves. Power tcneral theniseh es Christians and those who adhere to a in mar be liberal nor thought of as the ability to act or (10, the capacity alist relig:ous pOsitiOO. It thus appears that neither to accomplish chosen objecLLves. The kind o[ radical pacifism is the simple consequence of a specifically Chris pover essential to act or do will depend in 1arte tian position. If the classical Quaker insights are to be relevant c1e-ice on the nature the of objectives which one the contemporary situation, then, we might seek to develop a is pursuin. to third type of social analysis which would suggest a more direct The 5radical pacifist, further, sees commitment and social concern ° moral or spiritual power relationship between Christian we as being potentially the most effective of all types of power. in the working out of the peace testimony. In particular, This is the basis for his challenge to those theories of power should note the rejection by the Declaration of 1660 of the tra j)olitic.S which insist on the retention of armed force as the ulti diuonal interpretation of Romans 13 as a basis for the Christian mate sanction in society. This approach is suinnii riett b attitude to the structure of society. It may be productie to Bradford Lyttle: look into the implications of a contemporary analysis of Romans traditional inter 13 which suggests a striking alternative to the Power operating . . . in the affairs of men is tile with the name of ability to produce change or to resist change in pretation. This analysis is closely associated the social institutions and in the intentions, wills, and Oscar Cullmann, whose contribution on this point is, in C. Macgregor, “enor behavior of men. . . . The theory of power central words of New Testament scholar G. H. to nonviolent resnmuce is that the intentions and mously suggestive and relevant.” wills of human beings ‘‘the can be changed by a posver In Romans 13:1, Paul2 urges Christians to be subject to other tin’n fea Nonviolent power, spiritual powers” (KjV) or “the governing authorities” (RSV) J)OlVCh, the to change the minds and hearts higher poc “powers” or “authorities’ is exousia; of people ... is ttenerated b truthful action.’ The Greek word translated it clearly refers in this context to the Roman imperial and pro It can he said that, while the radical pacifist is more pessi vincial government. The same word, however, when used in mistic than the liberal pacifist about the likelihood of immedi the plural elsewhere in the New Testament, has a different ate constructive social change in is 3:10 — international relations, he meaning, as can be seen in the following examples: Eph. more optimistic the about chances for fundamental changes in “the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the the direction of society. The problem is that at both levels ex principalities and powers in the heavenly places”; Eph. 6:12 — perience tends to validate a more pessimistic view. Appeals to “we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the governments to make flexible negotiations central have little principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of effect in practice; disarmament agreements are reached only this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness when they are in line with the canons of power politics, and are were in tile heavenly places”; Col. 1:16 — “in him all thngs likely to be scrapped when they no longer serve the natonal in created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether terest. On the other hand, the peace movement as such contin thrones or dornin ions or principalities or authorities”; Col. 2:15 ues to be a tiny ineffectual and minority in America, and the Peter 3:22 — — “he disarmed the principalities and powers”; I experience of the unilateralist movement in England indicates right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and that there are factors which severely limit the extent, in actu “and is at the I Cor. 15:24 — “after destroying every ality, of the ‘bandwagon’ or ‘snowball’ effect. powers subject to him”;
17 16 rule and every authority and power.’’ It is generally accepted 13, the same spiritual powers which have been disarmed b these passages Christ that in the term e.’s’ousioirefers to invisible, spir God in the cruci6xion (Col. 2:15), are to be destroyed by itual authorities or powers, of angelic or demonic nature. Cull at the end of the age (I Cor. 15:24) , and against which Chris mann goes a step further and argues that this meaning of the tians in tI/C meanwhile have to contend, usilig “the whole armor word 0/Il is also in s 13. temi present Roman where the word re of God’’ (Eph. 6:11-13) , then we can discern the potential fers simnltaneousv to earthly governments and to COSmic, Spil - sic/n between Christians and the state even in Rornans 13. itual forces or beings. By pointing out the role of folk angel Culhnann’s ConcluSion regarding the intplicatioiis of New in Jewish thought in tIme days of Jesus and Paul, he provides Testament thought for the Church’s task in this age is this: backgiou:d for his claim that, for Paul, ‘‘the actual State author State everything nec it sJ’omh t of as the execuyi e agea t of angelic 1Jowers.’’ First, it must loyally give the oppase anarchy Clinton Morrison carries the algunlent further and shows that essary to its existence. It has to Zealotism within its own ranks. Second, it not only Jewish thought but also that of the Graeco-Rornan and all has to fulfil the office of watchman over the State. world in New Testament times assumed an intimate relationship That means: it must remain h-i principle critical between invisible spiritual powers and governments on earth. toward every State and be ready to warn it against Morrison concludes: transgression of its legitimate limits. Third, it There can be no proper unceistand ing of what must deny to the State which exceeds its limits early Christians, Jews, arid their pagan uonteuipu whatever such a State demands that lies i’-thin the varies understood as the State, in particular as the i-o-ovince of reli2io-idleological excess; and in its evoieciai, apart from that world view enveloping preaching. the Church must courageously describe nns and doino;ie,s. providence and powers, in this excess as opposition to 56God. winch the ruler was 1)0th divine by appointment and human by birth, and the boundaries between claiming that the state is not necessarily called to be While ues- the spirit world and the world of humanity and Christian, Cullmann does not fully and directly answer the c1 Christians nature were fluid and often imperceptible. non whether there may be circumstances in which I take in short, as W. A. Visser ‘t Hooft points out, can at once remain obedient to the commands of Christ and unequivocal answer Tie Biblical authors consider the state as the direct responsibility for government. An inference organ of superhuman forces, forces which are in to this question, indeed, cannot be drawn by direct faced themselves neither good nor bad, which may sers e from the New Testament. The early Christians were not Pe plan of God of their hut which mar a!so, if they run with a social situation in which the direct application wild. mm against God. 55 Christian commitment to the institutional structul-es of society is This interpretation shifts the emphasis away froni the was possible. A second problem posed for us by Cullmann ti-aclitional view. That view has generally supposed that the what to make of the apparently ‘mythological’ New Testament uau, approval by Romans 13 of the governing authority as ‘‘God’ unuerstandmmg of the state; it is difficult for contemporary invis servant for your good” (Rom. 13:4) is opposed to and nmav eve:i even as a Christian, to view the universe as one in which take precedence over the — rWe — noints of view of Acts 5:29 must ible porers — angels, clainmons, spiritual hosts abound. obey God rather than men” — and of Revelation 13, which sees in order to answer dhc rst of these go timswe n cd o tile as oh Roman empire the beast from the sea to which Satan, view’ the New Testament in tile context of the wilole sweep “the dragon gave his pOW and his throne and great author holy history.’ The Bible is primarily the account of th mighty ity,’’ (Rev. 13:2) and to which the Christian niay have to refuse acts of God in history, through which 1-c wins his vi:tory over submission. But when we come to see, in the exoosiai of Romans the forces of sin and darkness and establishes his reign on earth.
18 19 in the twentieth century has succeeded in strengthening its call Western Christendom has largely denied God’s commands to upon the religious loyalties of men. The international scene has execute justice, to recognize the dignity of all his children, to become the battleground for rival deities, as has been cogently turn aside from the way of the sword. The Communist nations portrayed by so hard-boiled a realist as Hans Morgenthau: may thus be instruments of his discipline much as the Assyrians and Chaldeans were upon the faithless people of Israel and morality of the partict1ar group, far from u The Jeremiah: limiting the struggle for power on the international dali. In light of this the Church’s task is like that of scene, gives that struggle a ferociousness and inteti with aching heart to warn its fellow-countrymen to submit to sity not known to other ages. For the claim to uni the chastisements of the Lord. Or it may be that God will bring versalitv which inspires the moral code of ofle about the miracle that will save us from destruction or tyranny. particular group is inconipa tible with the identi The Bible understands by miracle not a supernatural, inexplic claim cal of another group; the world has room able happening, but a sign of God’s kingdom, a great and potent for only one, and the other must yield or be de raising prophet or a people unto himself froim snoyed. Thus, carrying their idols before them, act of God in up a the nationalistic masses of our time meet in the in seemingly barren ground — an act with far-reaching, if unpre ternational arena, each group convinced that it dictable, historical consequences. We see such acts in the con executes the mandate of history, that it does for quest of Jericho, the return front the Babylonian captivity, the humanity what it seems to do for itself, and that Reformation, George Fox’s calling of the “great people to be it fulfills a sacred mission ordained by Providence, gathered.” The claim of the Christian faith is that the Church however defined. 57 is the chosen instrument for God’s mighty acts in the age of the But if the nations have thus become the true objects of wor new covenant. If such an act is to come about in our day, those ship of millions — even of many who believe themselves to be who claim to be the Church are called to seek the radical re Christians — they effectually fill the functions ascribed to the newal of this Church, purging it of its archaism and its indiffer ‘principalities and powers’ by Paul and his contemporaries. ence to justice and its alliance with the princes of this age. The The nation-state not only governs and restrains evil within its call is to become a committed, revitalized people of God, knit bounds; it also attracts the nationalistic worship which makes it together in devotion to the Christ who is present to them in such an infinite menace on the world scene. Spiritual power is comforting and awesome righteousness. Only such a people a reality — but not only for good. would have a faith strong enough and deep enough to displace loyalty to the nation, as the bearer of ultimate and universal THE PEACE TESTIMONY AND THE TRIUMPH OF GOD value, in the hearts of their neighbors, countrymen, and fellow- What is the relationshp today of these great thrones and humans over the whole earth. authorities and powers to the sovereign God of history, whose Signs of the beginnitigs of such a renewal are not lacking triumph over them on the scene of history is assured, through in our generation; the peculiar task of the Society of Friends, or the cross and resurrection, but not yet final and complete? The o- those in it who catch the vision of such a Church, is, first, to Biblical, prophetic perspective history suggests on three possibil relate ourselves closely to the forces of renewal that are already ities. We may, indeed, be approacl’ing the apocalyptic end of present. Quakerism’s task is, secondly, to demonstrate in our I]istory, in which Christ will appear in judgment on the mush— lives and in rigorous Christian thought how indispensable room clotids. For such a contingency the Church’s task is one of own for the Church, if the potential of these prayer and waiting, in faithful obedience. Or God may have the peace testimony is is to be realized, in this day when the Church raised up the Communist powers fls vessels for his wrath upon forces for reHewal those peoples who call themselves after the name of Christ. For needs to die again “to the elemental spirits of the universe”
22 1 w
(Col. 2:20) which are so visibly guiding the destinies of the References nations. I) JIorks, Gould, 1831, Vol. Il, i• 350. I. George Fox, quoted in Ed Specific practical steps, in which this task for Quakerism William Penn, letter to Jasnes 1-larrison, August 25, 1681, 2. “Holy Exfmerimrr t.” Temple Uni can be made concrete, are likely to emerge if and as a group of win B. Bronner, William Penn’s versity, 1962, p. 6. Friends becomes concerned to implement this approach. Only John ickalls. Cambridge, 1952, ii. The Join no! of George For. ed. by LX a few tentative proposals can be suggested here. The program pp. 399f. Toronto Quaker Tl’nrs iii Foreign Policy. University of of the Church Peace Mission, for instance, is a step in the right 4. Robert 0. Byrd, Press, 1960. 191f. direction in ternis of tackling the theological dimensions of this p 5. ibid., p. 184. ‘relativist- ‘prophct-recOveliCr’ polov is not identical with the task; this program needs to be made much stronger and more ex 6. The t (Quakerismfl and absolutist’ t pology delineated by Frederick B. Tolles tensive. Peace education conferences, ilistitutes, and study pro College, NC., Time Ward Lecture, 1956. p. 20). Fred Politics, Guiiford di’dne suggests “the prophetic stance or the role of the grams could be given a new direction by centering them around erick Tolles ‘relativist’ and lobbyist’ (ibid.. p 21) as a via media between the the study of basic Biblical theology. Public witness projects niight positions, and he names, as contributors to the develop ‘absolutist’ ‘prophet) and be moved in the direction of some form of ‘prophetic symbol of this third position, Cecil Hinsisaw (a typical ment of these two, Bertram Pickard (a typical ‘reconciler’) - He notes that, ism.’ Above all, these programs need to emerge out ol’the context - Pickard sugycsts the “less radical way” (ibid., p. 22, n. 39 Bertram and ‘recon of corporate groups of Christians who are concerned for renewal Thus, in relation to Frederick Tolles’ typology, ‘prophet’ less ‘radical,’ of the of the Church and of the world, and who have come together br ciler’ can be considered as suh.typeS. more or intermediate “prophetic Stance.” Power, 1955, p. 63. common study, seeking, prayer, and social and missionary action. American Friends Service Committee, Speak Truth to 7. Toward Secmrritr Through Dis Such are the outlines of a ‘Christian pacifist’ position, which S. American Friends Service Committee, rcourtcsv of Swartlmniore College Peace Collectionl, aees society as the arena for the conflict of vast spiritual powers, armament, 1952. pp. 41f. suggests commitment to a radical renewal of the Church as the 9. AFSC. Speak Truth to Pone,, p. 65. Steps to Peace, Golianc’. 1951. p.lO. basis for social change, and places its hope at the international 10. American Friends Service Committee, Speak Truth to Power, p. 60. 11. AFSC, Friends Intelligenccr lex el in taming or by-passing such deironic forces as rampant 12. jack Powelson, “Nonviolence and Understanding,” nationalism through participation in Christ’s victory. This posi Third Month 28, 1953 Vol. 110, p. 168. ibid., 167. tion has strong 13. p. Mr. President, privately points of contrast with the liberal pacifist and 14. Harrop Fieeman and Ruth Freeman, Dear radical pacifist positions. The former sees society as aggre printed, 1961, p. 29. an Phillips Ruopp, “that world 15. Byrd. op. cit., p. 64; compare the view of gate of individuals, suggests that social change comes primarily should be a major explicit long-range goal of American government Pendle Hill through changing the lives anti outlooks of individuals, and puts foreign policy.” (Private Testimony and Public Policy, 1959, 22.) its hope al the international level in the development of Pamphlet 105, p. and per Levering, “The Requirements of Peace,” Board on Peace 16. Samuel R. For Friendly sonal contacts antI understanding among individual leaders in Social Concerns, The Five Years Meeting of Friends,” the nations. The latter sees society as a network of power- Persuasion” Series leaflet, September 1958. structures, 17. ibid. emphasizes the involvement of liOlTh in power- 18. Byrd, op. cit., p. 64. Harper, 1962, p. 324. exercising organizations for peace as the direction for social 19. Kenneth E. Boulding, Conflict and Defense, 20. ibid., p. 310. change, and places its hope at the international level in the on the citizen-goverflhl1C11t 21. Ruopp, op. cit., p. 10; conipare this statement exercise of in the initial Statement of Purpose of the Friends Coin spiritual power through organized non-violent action. relationship to on National Legislation: the Committee “is not expected It is suggested here that such a ‘Christian pacifist’ position mittec proposes rather engage in lobbying of time pressure-group character. It contacts amid may incorporate the best insights for today’s needs of the early to work by methods of quiet influence through personal win the assent of reasonable minds and enlist sympa Quaker contribution to the question of the relationship between persuasion to Friends thies with the objectives sought.” (quoted in The FCNL S!ov, Christian commitment and social concern on the international Committee on National Legislation, 1958, p. 7.) scene. 22. Byrd, op. cit., p. 50.
21 25
I. 57.
56.
52. 51. 50. 48. 49. 17. 53. 45. -1-1. 46. 43. 34. 42. 41. 28. 38. 39. 36. 34. 31. 24. 35. 29. 25. 33. 26. 23. 27. 32. 30.
10
i7.
5.
Hans
Oscar 55.
Clinton G. Sibley, Sibley, A. Charles Hinshaw, Oscar Bradford Muste, Muste, Sibley, Hinshaw, ibid., James Sibley, ibid. Sfuste, Mulford A. Botilding, ibid., Cecil ibid., ibid., ibid., Byrd, ibid., ibid.. Boulding, th;d. ibid.,
90f. Sidelights, No. Filson, of printed, printed,
esy P.
rence” American lege
H.
J.
A.
J.
J.
47.
Muste, Paul’s
E. p. p.
p. p. Muste, p. p. Cuhlinann. p. p.
C.
of op.
Visser
Cullmann,
29,
op. op. Not
U)). E. Non-Violence
op. op.
Peace
Morgentbau,
D.
C. 31.
36.
Hinshaw,
230
273.
241.
21. 150. Macgregor, 146. Sibley,
Swarthmore
Lyttle.
SCM
Series
op.
ojs. cit.,
SCM op. op.
Bristol,
cit.,
cit.,
cit., 1961, Morrison. 1958,
cit.,
cit.,
By Walker,
Thought,” Non-Violence and
Friends
‘t
Hartford Not
cit., Collection].
cit., cit., cit.,
p.
Might, p.
p. Hooft, Press,
p.
P.
Press,
P.
study,
P.
Unilateral Pp.
National
passirn. The
66.
20.
By Christ 49.
p.
Nonviolent p. 123.
19. p.
p. 20.
8. The
Organizing
“Principalities
Politirs 121.
2.
in Service 35.
Might, 78. The
College 1951, 31.
Slate P.
1960,
The
American
Seminary
(Ill
Missing
in
and 101.
p.
Powers
Defense
in
K,yoshi, Initiatives
Agi4res,sie p.
p. Harvey
in
Among
112. Committee,
Harper,
Peace (In
Time,
Resi.ctancr,
195.
99.
tile
for
26
Ingredient
Foundation .dggIessive
Friends
That
tL
Nezi and
Collection],
Nonri’lknt K.
Naticis.3rc1
of 10
tr.
1917,
and
Jlurid,
McArtI-,ur. Powers:
Cim-ist, Be,
omi:’iole:if
frons
Testa,na’,’t,
1954,
Sei Pendle
Disarmament,
‘courtesy
Studies
World, —
Press. ice
p.
the
p.
1-larper.
p. Unilateral
The
Direct
Hill
Committee,
ed.,
6.
2-4.
German
124.
ad
1-larper. iii
1960.
Scrihuer’s, Resistance,
of Cosmic
Knopf,
Pamphlet
Biblical
Action,
I Swarthinore
New
9-18,
“Beyond
p.
Disarmanient,
by
1910.
Background
101.
1960,
1962. p.
Tes!a1,7(-;lt
lheo1ogy
1956,
Flod
privately pr:vaely
88.
136.
rcoiirt_
Deter p259.
ta
1936,
Col
pp.
19. V.
I
r (
Comments
provocative his analysis of
The and
and
sion, contribution whose in role
is for accurate
produce sion having
where vergence needed. makes
chide
of knowledge,”
and is, fat--reaching ory
virtually
a
effecting
he views the
basic
I
On with
the
of of “Christian
Vail
because
cleansing
liberal
between
will
myself, fails values
church
them
his
power, change
the
of
the
sensitizing
it
change. description
his
on
of Palmer,
Sociologists
the confine
by infinite. to
paper
theory formula
the
first,
view, feeling
forces
in
ready
historical
the are fails in
relate call
liberal
organizing individuality
of
“to
specifically
which
a
kind
pacifist”
promoting
largely I
real
liberal-radical
the
to
however, The himself
it
respond nmv
with
find
falls of
for
that
It
that
the for
three
the of
of
church
sense
and
takes
the
represents
speak
comments
radical
consequences” revolutionary
myself
the
revolutionary
radical “great
bankrupt
suddenly
its
down. both intervention
third
this
individual points:
to radical
spiritual
it
creatively
while
advantage
nature
emphasis
accornodation
anti
do
as
buys
of
are
power
pacifist
essentially
force.
and
27
the social
dichotomy,
so
this
a
The
corporateness,
on
his
pacifist
he
inadequate
opens time,
and
holding
when
of
potent
power,
key
deplores
himself, spirit,
Vail discussion
to change.
as of
with
change
society change.
to on STEPHEN
of
apocalyptic
whose
but to
the
God
the
he
the any
these views
in
personal
Palmer’s
act
needed
his and action, in
makes
I
and
calls
burgeoning
agreement
minds
unpredictable
in doubt
in capacity as needed comprehensive and
the
of
situations recognition
Others,
new
But of
of his,
certain
reflecting conies
history.
his
God.
for
historic
social social
not change. I
an
dimension
conversation
helpful
vistas.
he its
to
think G.
of
delineation
the
in
important
to
a .
me, adequacy
and
thinks men
closer with
respects. .
CARY
formula
change, a change,
vistas
renewal
of
destroy with
failure
of world
this a
There
mncuc
That
I anti
ten con
ten
and
his
the the
in
to to its
of
is is