Leaven

Volume 7 Issue 4 Restoration Themes Article 7

1-1-1999

The Ethics of War: Pacifism and Militarism in the American

Michael W. Casey

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven

Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Commons

Recommended Citation Casey, Michael W. (1999) "The Ethics of War: Pacifism and Militarism in the American Restoration Movement," Leaven: Vol. 7 : Iss. 4 , Article 7. Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol7/iss4/7

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Religion at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Leaven by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Casey: The Ethics of War: Pacifism and Militarism in the American Restor

194 Leaven, Fall, 1999 The Ethics of War Pacifism and Militarism in the American Restoration Movement

BY MICHAEL W. CASEY

Pacifists and militarists can be found in all three wrong. The central principle of Christ's kingdom was groups of the Stone-Campbell tradition. Exceedingly love: "Philosophy as well as religion teaches us that to complex, issues of war and peace have often taken cen- conquer enemies is not the work of swords, nor lances, ter stage in the Restoration movement and defy simple nor bows of steel. To conquer an enemy is to con- characterizations. However, the importance of the ethi- vert him into a friend To do this all arms and modes cal question of war and the centrality of the debate over of warfare are impotent, save the arms and munitions of war in our heritage make the effort to discern some pat- everlasting love." Campbell pointed to Christ and the terns worth the risk of oversimplification. I will lay out Sermon on the Mount: "If he would not have any of the history of pacifism and militarism in three broad them render evil for evil, and ifhe pronounced the high- periods, noting the important shifts and arguments across est honor and blessing on the peacemakers, who can the tradition, and then draw tentative conclusions about imagine that he would be a patron of war!" Campbell the nature of pacifism and pro-war positions in the en- argued further that it was wrong for to fight tire Restoration movement. in war, because his kingdom "is not of this world." He also deplored the horrors of war: "the battle field itself, The Formulation of Positions: From Campbell covered with the gore and scattered limbs of butchered through the Civil War myriads ..., the wounded lying upon one another, wel- The discussion over the ethics of war in the Resto- tering in their blood ..., invoking death as the only ration movement started with Alexander Campbell. In respite from excruciating torments ..., the enduring 1823, in the very first issue of the , wail of widows and orphans"-they all "say to the Chris- Campbell urged that Christ "gives no scope to any ma- tian, How can you become a soldier? How countenance lignant passions, and checks every principle that would and aid this horrible type of work of death?"! These lead to war, oppression or cruelty." With biting satire beliefs became the basis for the primitivist pacifism of he wrote that it was "strange" and inconsistent for a the . "Christian general" and his "chaplain at his elbow" to Despite his belief that Christ's kingdom was encourage "Christian warriors" to go into battle "with otherworldly, Campbell also accepted the optimistic the bible in one hand and the sword in the other" in modem view that war could be prevented and possibly order to make "as many widows and orphans as will eliminated. He was very supportive of the American afford sufficient opportunity for others to manifest the peace movement and regularly reported efforts ofvari- purity of their religion by taking care of them!'!" For ous peace societies. He turned to the suggestions of the Campbell, the ethics of the kingdom of God made war peace movement to answer questions on how to settle

Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1999 1 Leaven, Vol. 7 [1999], Iss. 4, Art. 7

Restoration Themes 195

national conflicts: "Why not have a by-law-established Lipscomb, as a young man, did not agree with Umpire," Campbell asked,"a Congress of Nations and Fanning's view of politics and apparently was not a paci- a High Court of Nations for adjudicating and terminat- fist before the Civil War. In 1855 Lipscomb gave a ing all international misunderstandings and complaints, Fourth ofJuly speech to the Franklin College alumni in redressing and remedying all wrongs and grievances?'? Nashville in which he argued that the was Here were the seeds of liberal optimistic pacifism of the first government founded on the principles of Chris- the Disciples of Christ. tianity. The government was an extension of Christian- Despite his consistent pacifism,Campbell refused ity: "We would especially have every American free- to speak out against the Mexican War when war broke man approach the ballot box ofhis country as the sacra- out in 1846. Instead, he waited until 1848, after the war mental altar of his God-with bared feet and uncov- was over, to give his famous "Address on War." He ad- ered head, conscious that he treads upon holy ground." mitted that he was "sorry" and "ashamed" that he had Even in 1860, on the eve of the Civil War, Lipscomb not spoken out or written an essay earlier on the sub- voted for John Bell for president. Bell, a Tennessean, ject.' Barton Stone, however, a couple of years before was the Constitutional Union Party candidate and was the war, made his pacifist stance clear:"A nation pro- interested in preserving the Union from Civil War." fessing christianity, yet teaching, learning and practic- The outbreak of the Civil War caused Lipscomb to ing the arts of war cannot be of the kingdom of'Christ.?' reevaluate his ideas. He lamented that with the Civil , who was influenced by Campbell and War "the spectacle was presented, of disciples of the Stone, also made his opposition to war explicit during Prince of Peace, with murderous weapons seeking the the Mexican War.' However, not all Stone-Campbell lives of their fellowmen." Christians "were found im- leaders were pacifists. Debate emerged in some of the bruing their hands in the blood of their own brethren in journals over the proper response to war." Christ, making their sisters widows and their sisters' When the Civil War broke out, church members and children orphans." He realized that "[i]t took but little leaders had to decide what stance to take. Many de- thought to see that Christians cannot slay one another cided to fight. In 1861 Colonel James Garfield led an or their fellowmen, at the behest of any earthly ruler, or abortive attempt to get the American Christian Mission- to establish or maintain any human government."? He ary Society to pass loyalty resolutions for the North. By concluded, agreeing with Tolbert Fanning, that it was 1863 the loyalists gained control and passed loyalty reso- wrong for Christians even to vote in political elections. lutions that affirmed their "sympathies" for Union sol- Lipscomb turned pessimistic toward government. diers who were "defending" them "from the attempts of He believed that God had instituted his own govern- armed traitors to overthrow" the federal government.' ment to govern and control humans. Humans, however, Southerners were enraged over the resolutions, and the "in the spirit of rebellion against God," established their was reestablished to carry on the paci- own political systems "to conduct the affairs of the earth fist sentiments of Tolbert Fanning and . free from God's rule and dominion." War, from the be- Northern radicals routed moderates who were pacifists ginning of human governments, has been its "chief oc- or neutrals in the war and established the Christian Stan- cupation." Also, "all the wars and strifes between tribes, dard to espouse the militarist view. races, nations ... have been the result of man's efforts to govern himself and the world, rather than submit to Divergent Paths: The Post-bellum Period to the government of God." Because of the rebellious, World Warl fallen nature of human governments, Christians should David Lipscomb emerged after the Civil War as the not "make any alliance with, enter into, support, main- primary advocate of pacifism in the tradition. Lipscomb tain and defend, or appeal to, or depend upon, these was familiar with Campbell's pacifism, and Tolbert Fan- human governments for aid or help." Instead, God's gov- ning mentored Lipscomb. Fanning had a very pessimis- ernment, or the church, was to be "an ark of safety" for tic view of politics and government and believed that Christians. The "kingdom of heaven-the Church of Christians should not participate in government nor even God aspires to universal and eternal domination on vote. earth to break into pieces and destroy all earthly

https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol7/iss4/7 2 Casey: The Ethics of War: Pacifism and Militarism in the American Restor

196 Leaven, Fall, 1999

kingdoms and dominions, and fill the whole earth and Lipscomb did not support the American peace move- stand forever ... and to reinstate the authority and rule ment, saying that he had "no faith in any peace organi- of God on earth through his own kingdom."!" The citi- zation." He added that some "of the bitterest war men zenship of Christians was ultimately in heaven and not in the land are leaders of this peace association." In- stead of human societies, even if they were moral soci- eties, the church was the only organization that could promote peace. He warned that a Christian "is wasting The church, or kingdom of time in seeking peace for the world in other institu- God, was-a peaceable tions."!' Northern Disciples, on the other hand, displayed kingdom and stood in stark the traits that Lipscomb opposed. Most Disciples be- came supporters of the peace movement and the idea of contrast to the violence and international arbitration to avoid conflict. However, as war characteristic of human tensions with Spain erupted, the Disciples press became as bellicose as the secular press. The Disciples quickly governments. accepted the standard militarist line."

Different Pacifisms but the Same Militarism: in any earthly kingdom. From World War I to the Present The church, or kingdom of God, was a peaceable Pacifism had all but disappeared by World War I in kingdom and stood in stark contrast to the violence and the Disciples. Kirby Page, a Disciple and a leading paci- war characteristic of human governments. Christians fist, conceded that before the war he had never "met an could not fight in war or kill. The Sermon on the Mount informed and determined pacifist.':" Liberal pacifism, contained the principles that govern the kingdom of God, however, soon bore fruit from the seed of the social which included "that they take no part in civil affairs." gospel that influenced many leading Disciples think- Lipscomb recognized that this placed his ideas in the ers. Alva Taylor, professor at Vanderbilt's School of Re- tradition of the Anabaptists who advocated peace and a ligion, and Charles Clayton Morrison, editor of the

complete separation of church and state. II Christian Century, studied at the Disciples Divinity Through the Gospel Advocate after the Civil War, House at the University of Chicago under Herbert L. Lipscomb published pacifist articles. He condemned Willett, Shailer Mathews, Edward Scribner Ames, and those in the Restoration movement who advocated other liberal professors." Taylor and Morrison pursued "Christian patriotism." Colorful J. D. Tant summed up peace education and pressed pacifist views through the the Gospel Advocate's pacifist position during the Span- first half of the twentieth century. Kirby Page became ish-American War: "I would as soon risk my chance of one of the leading evangelists for liberal pacifism and heaven to die drunk in a bawdy house as to die on the was an especially popular speaker on college campuses battlefield, with murder in my heart, trying to kill my during the 1930s. During the heady days of the 1930s, fellowman.':" the high-water mark for liberal pacifism, many Disciples The war issue exacerbated the growing division believed that it was possible to eradicate war from hu- between the Disciples of Christ and the Churches of manity. Morrison wrote one ofthe leading pacifist tomes, Christ. The war resolutions passed by the missionary The Outlawry of War. In the fall of 1934, the Disciples society simply confirmed to Lipscomb the problem of convention at Des Moines passed a pacifist resolution

an extracongregational organization's attempting to do by a two-to-one majority. I? On October 18, 1935, after the work of the local church. Lipscomb and other Ad- the World Convention of Churches of Christ (Disciples) vocate writers would quickly point out the times when met, the Disciples Peace Fellowship (DPF) was orga- Disciples of Christ advocated or supported American nized in response to concern over the Italian invasion war efforts in the years succeeding the Civil War. of Ethiopia. IS DPF' s charter took a liberal pacifist stance:

Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1999 3 Leaven, Vol. 7 [1999], Iss. 4, Art. 7

Restoration Themes 197

"WE DO SOLEMNLYcovenanttogether ... to promote peace pressure, and local pro-war church members." Many and to oppose war now and always. We propose to carry church members, seeking a more prestigious role in so- out this covenant for the abolition of war by fostering ciety, shed pacifism as an embarrassment." After the good will among nations, races and classes, by oppos- war the mainstream Churches of Christ moved toward ing military preparations .... "19 In 1936 the Disciples a pro-war stance, while various splinter groups (the convention, like most other mainline Protestant groups, premillennial, the non-Sunday school, the one-cup, and passed a resolution opposing rearmament because "war the African American Churches of Christ) dissented and was morally and ethically wrong and opposed to the maintained Lipscomb's countercultural stance. The tiny teachings of Christ." They also naively announced one-cup Churches of Christ are still on record as a "peace that "we will not support future wars.'?" church." Some in the mainstream continued to hold to Conservative Disciples after World War I main- pacifist beliefs in the face of increased economic and tained the militarist stance that emerged during the Civil social prosperity. During the 1930s, as the peace move- War. Writers in the were openly ment gained prestige, many persons and congregations hostile to liberal pacifism and argued that DPF was more in the Churches of Christ became attracted to pacifism of a threat to the United States than to Germany." This again, and many churches went on record as being op- hostility was linked to the conservative Disciples' dis- dain for the social gospel. Most conservatives believed that individuals needed to be evangelized and that soci- ety would not be transformed by social principles." This During the Great Depres- militarist ethic has remained, as a recent sociological sion, some preachers study found the Independent Christian Churches to be the least pacifist of the three major groups of the Stone- became concerned with the Campbell tradition." threat of Communism and Pearl Harbor shattered Disciples' confidence in lib- eral pacifism, as most saw United States involvement started an anti-Communist in war as ajustifiable means to stop the evils of Nazism effort that reached its height and Japanese aggression. Neoorthodoxy began to re- place liberalism as the central theological thrust in main- during the 1950s and early line Protestantism. DPF supported Disciples conscien- tious objectors of World War II in their alternative ser- 1960s. vice, but the organization shrank and remains small and on the periphery of the Disciples denomination." Paci- fism also went into decline within the Churches of posed to Christians' fighting in war." Christ. With the extraordinary success of the propaganda During the Great Depression, some preachers be- of the Committee on Public Information, the United came concerned with the threat of Communism and States was transformed from isolationism to patriotic started an anti-Communist effort that reached its height zeal for World War I. With the support of new surveil- during the 1950s and early 1960s. George Benson took lance tactics by the new Bureau ofInvestigation, xeno- Harding College, one of the leading colleges that had phobic Americans, and the Alien and Sedition Acts, the supported conscientious objection, and turned the school government was able to effectively suppress dissent to into a hotbed of patriotic conservative politics and right- the war through arrests and intimidation. The pacifist wing anti-Communism. Funded by millions of dollars Gospel Advocate was under threat oflosing its mailing from conservative businessmen, Harding was ahead of privileges and so changed its editorial policy to support others in the transformation of the Churches of Christ the war." Cordell Christian College, the largest school away from its pacifism roots." in the Churches of Christ, was decidedly pacifist. Cordell Pearl Harbor also had a dramatic impact on the gen- was closed by government surveillance, community erally isolationist membership of the Churches of Christ.

https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol7/iss4/7 4 Casey: The Ethics of War: Pacifism and Militarism in the American Restor

198 Leaven, Fall, 1999

Most preachers and publications came out in support of ~Lunger, 256-57. the war, with a vociferous minority protesting the -'Lunger, 250. change." Still, there were 199 men officially from the 4 Barton Stone, "Lecture on MatI. V. VI. and VII. Chap- ters," 14 (July 1844): 65. Churches of Christ in the Civilian Public Service, the 5Tolbert Fanning,"Peace," Christian Review 3 (March alternative service available for conscientious objectors 1846): 65. during the war, making the Churches of Christ the fourth 6David Edwin Harrell Jr., Questfor a Christian America: largest non-peace group during the war." After the war, The Disciples of Christ and American Society to 1866 (Nash- pacifism was relegated to status as an individual mat- ville: Disciples of Christ Historical Society, 1966), 142-44. ter, with churches less willing to discuss the issue pro "Harrell, Questfor a Christian America, 163. 8David Lipscomb, "Our Positions," Gospel Advocate (22 or con. Most members became assimilated into main- August 1912): 954. stream society as the Churches of Christ enjoyed the 9David Lipscomb, Civil Government. 1ts Origin, Mis- postwar economic boom. The anti-Communist cam- sion and Destiny, and the Christian's Relation to 1t (Wesson, paigns were successful, and by the 1990s most church Miss.: Lynnwood Smith, 1984; org. ed. 1889), iii-iv. members were habitual pro-military conservative Re- 10Lipscomb, Civil Government, 40-41, 10, 12; and publicans. Lipscomb,"The Blessing Promised to Man-No.5," Gospel Advocate (9 April 1868): 356.

II Lipscomb, Civil Government, 134-35. Conclusion 12David E. Harrell Jr., "Disciples of Christ Pacifism in The odd paradox of the Stone-Campbell tradition Nineteenth Century ," Tennessee Historical Quar- is that the extreme theological fringes, the one-cup terly 21 (September 1962): 274. Churches of Christ on the right and the Disciples Peace 13Ibid., 272-73. Fellowship on the left, have retained the pacifism of the 14David Edwin Harrell Jr., The Social Sources of Divi- sion in the Disciples of Christ, 1865-1900: A Social History first-generation leaders, while the broad "mainstream" of the Disciples of Christ, vol. 2 (Atlanta: Publishing Sys- of a cappella Churches of Christ, the Independent Chris- tems, 1973),248-49. tian Churches, and the Disciples of Christ tend to be 15Peter Brock,"Pacifism among the Disciples of Christ: militarist. At first glance the Disciples Peace Fellow- A Denominational Option," in Freedomfrom War: Nonsec- ship and the one-cup Churches of Christ seem to have tarian Pacifism 1814-1914 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1991), 151. little in common other than being small. However, most 16Harrell, Social Sources of Division, 99-100. On Tay- pacifists remain out of step and even opposed to the lor, see also James A. Crain, The Development of Social Ideas predominate values of society. The theological fringes, among the Disciples Of Christ (St. Louis: Bethany, 1969), each in a unique way, stand opposed both to the cultural 81-89. values of American militarism and to the assimilation 17Charles Chatfield, For Peace and Justice: Pacifism in of most of the Stone-Campbell movement to those val- America, 1914-1941 (Knoxville: University of Tennessee ues. Both groups remain to ask, What is the Christian Press, 1971), 126. 18Crain, 129. response to war? and, Should the answer of American 19Mark A. May, "Disciples Peace Fellowship: Historical society to the first question be the answer of Christ's Formation and the First Twenty Years, 1935-1955," church? Discipliana 40 (1980): 19-26. 2°Crain, 138. MICHAEL W. CASEY teaches communication at 21May, 24. Pepperdine University and serves on the Editorial Board 22See Kevin R. Kragenbrink, "Dividing the Disciples: Social, Cultural and Intellectual Sources of Division in the of LEAVEN. Disciples of Christ, 1919-1945" (Ph.D. diss., Auburn Uni- versity, 1996), 290-349 for the conservative reaction to the social gospel movement and pacifism in the Disciples. 23Laurence C. Keene, Heirs of Stone and Campbell on Notes the Pacific Slope: A Sociological Approach (Claremont: Dis- I All of the quotes from Campbell can be found in Harold ciples Seminary Foundation, 1984),67. Lunger, The Political Ethics of Alexander Campbell (St. Louis: 24May, 25-26. Bethany, 1954),242-63. 25Michael W. Casey and MichaelA. Jordan, "Free Speech in Time of War: Government Surveillance of the Churches of (Notes continued on pg. 211 )

Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1999 5