DOCSLIB.ORG

ABSTRACT Jus Post Bellum and Christian Perspectives on The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ABSTRACT Jus Post Bellum and Christian Perspectives on The ABSTRACT Jus Post Bellum and Christian Perspectives on the Ethical Use of Force: Reframing the Traditional Debate Jeremy S. Stirm, Ph.D. Mentor: Paul Martens, Ph.D. This dissertation examines the potential effect of the jus post bellum (post-war justice and peace) debate on the larger just war framework in order to argue that this category has the potential to reframe the traditional debate between various Christian responses to the ethical use of force. In addition to the traditional debates between Christian realism, pacifism, and the just war tradition, there has arisen in recent decades a debate within just war circles regarding the presumption against war thesis. While the debates between these various responses to the ethical use of force have produced some beneficial effects, the contemporary debates have become increasingly partisan and stymied in a state of gridlock. I utilize the developing jus post bellum discussions as a lens through which to view anew the traditional debates and move beyond the impasse. The emphasis on the relationship of the phases of war (in bello, ad bellum, and now post bellum) that emerged from jus post bellum discussions challenges recent trends in the use of just war reasoning by both presumption against war advocates and classic just war supporters. What is more, jus post bellum discussions have given us a new way to speak meaningfully about the ethically complex notion of humanitarian intervention in the form of The Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The three pillars of R2P, the responsibility to prevent, react, and rebuild, correspond to the traditional just war categories of in bello, ad bellum, and post bellum respectively, and once again emphasize the importance of the relationship of the phases of war and a holistic just war approach. While disagreement concerning the ethical use of force persists at the ad bellum level between the just war tradition, Christian realism, and pacifism, this reality does not rule out post bellum cooperation. This project concludes with a practical application of a robust jus post bellum strategy, arguing that care for the moral injury of returning warriors provides one area of common cause for collaboration between Christian realists, pacifists, and just war supporters. Copyright © 2014 by Jeremy S. Stirm All rights reserved TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures viii List of Tables ix Acknowledgments x Chapter 1 Introduction 1 Prolegomena Purpose Preliminary Background Problem Plan of the Project Chapter 2 Identifying the Framework: Christian Perspectives on War and Peace 14 Introduction Christian Realism Introduction Reinhold Niebuhr’s Enduring Influence Reinhold Niebuhr and Christian Realism Pacifism Just War Tradition Conclusion Chapter 3 Iron Sharpening Iron: Christian Perspectives Interact 49 Introduction Christian Realism and Pacifism Reinhold Niebuhr’s Critique Thesis one: Gospel Thesis two: Modern Pacifism is Heretical Jesus’ Ethic Reception of Reinhold Niebuhr John Howard Yoder’s Counter-Critique Christian Realism and Just War The Jesus Ethic Pacifism and Just War Just War in Dialogue with Itself: Perilous Presumptions The Growing Debate about Presumptions v Conclusion Chapter 4 A New Arrival on the Scene: Jus Post Bellum 98 Introduction Theology’s Turn to Jus Post Bellum Michael J. Schuck Kenneth R. Himes Louis V. Iasiello Doug McCready Mark J. Allman and Tobias L. Winright Conclusion Chapter 5 Jus Post Bellum and Christian Perspectives on War and Peace: A Holistic Just War Tradition 125 Introduction Yoder’s Test for the Just War Tradition: Limiting the Instances of War Contemporary Just War Theory: Limiting the Instances of War The Classic Just War Tradition: Justifying Instances of War George Weigel and the Forgotten Just War Tradition James Turner Johnson and the Broken Just War Tradition Justifying War and the Forgotten Art of Planning for Peace Christian Realism: Critiquing the System Jus Post Bellum and the Just War Tradition Just War: A Holistic Approach Post Bellum in Context Conclusion Chapter 6 Humanitarian Intervention, the Responsibility to Protect, and Jus Post Bellum 163 Introduction Christian Realism and Jus Post Bellum Outline of the Chapter The Road to The Responsibility to Protect Reception of The Responsibility to Protect Just Peacemaking and the Responsibility to Prevent Just Policing and the Responsibility to React Jus Post Bellum Proper and the Responsibility to Rebuild Rebuilding and Jus Post Bellum Working Together: Jus Post Bellum and Returning Warriors Conclusion Chapter 7 Concluding Summary 219 vi Bibliography 223 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 6.1 Swanstrom and Weissmann on the Conflict Cycle 197 viii LIST OF TABLES Table 6.1 Stages of Conflict and Tools Available 196 ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Over the past eight years at Baylor University I have received support and encouragement from a great number of individuals. I would like to thank Dr. Paul Martens, my dissertation mentor, for encouraging me to take on this project. Your guidance has been instructive and thoughtful, and your sense of humor a good medicine for the stress that often accompanies the writing process. I would like to thank Dr. Jonathan Tran for serving on my dissertation committee. We started Baylor together, Dr. Tran as a professor and me as a student. Working as a teaching assistant for him in those early semesters was a rewarding experience. I would also like to express thanks to Dr. David Corey for serving on my dissertation committee and for introducing me to the academic study of the just war tradition. I would also like to thank Dr. Ralph Wood and Dr. Doug Weaver for serving on my dissertation committee. In addition, Lisa Long has provided valuable assistance throughout my doctoral studies and especially in the final days of dissertation preparation. Your assistance in dealing with on campus issues as I was often out of town is greatly appreciated. I would also like to express a work of thanks to all the service members I have had the opportunity and privilege to serve with in the 20th Special Forces Group (Airborne) and the 36th Infantry Division. My experiences in Special Forces and serving as an Army Chaplain have helped inform my theological imagination in ways I will probably never fully comprehend. De Oppresso Liber. x I would also like to thank my wife Melissa. Thank you for your constant support and encouragement over the years. You were always there to help me when I was not sure I could continue writing. To Caleb and Kamryn, I thank you for keeping me sane throughout this lengthy process and for being a constant reminder of what is truly important. Now that this dissertation has come to completion, there is only one thing left to say, “Daddy is done with his dissertation, let’s go play!” xi CHAPTER ONE Introduction 1. Prolegomena The air was crisp and cool, and the sky was clear and deep blue. It was just after dinner. I sat on the front porch drinking tea with my ODA (Operational Detachment Alpha) team commander. We were discussing the day’s events and what lay ahead for tomorrow. My team had just completed a combat tour in Afghanistan. Now we were in Uzbekistan on a training mission. Both of us were anxious to return home to our family and friends. Amidst the discussion that evening was the then possible U.S. led invasion into Iraq. Looking up at the clear night sky that evening in late March 2003, we both knew it in our gut. If we were going to invade Iraq, tonight would be the perfect night to do it. The next morning we watched the live news broadcasts of U.S. tanks advancing towards Bagdad. Our prediction was proven correct. The U.S. was now engaged in combat operations in both Afghanistan and now Iraq. Both of these wars were of course precipitated by the events of September 11, 2001. It has been over a decade since the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and the failed attempt that ended in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. While questions concerning how such horrific events could transpire on U.S. soil have not totally abated, other increasingly pressing questions are persistently being asked. 1 The U.S. has pronounced an end to the war in Iraq and has subsequently executed its withdrawal of troops from Iraq and continues to contemplate an end to its presences in Afghanistan. Yet, as President Barrack Obama indicated in a speech given at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, ceremonially marking an end to the nine-year Iraq War, ending wars is an especially precarious business: “It’s harder to end a war than begin one.”1 While there are the obvious logistical, economic, and political concerns about ending wars, there are also important ethical and moral questions that need to be addressed. In recent years, the category of jus post bellum has resurfaced to address the moral considerations of post war justice and peace. While the literature on jus post bellum continues to grow within various academic fields including political philosophy, international relations, and military science,2 Christian theology, however, has been relatively slow in addressing this 3 important component of just war thought. 1 For the full text of the President’s speech, see http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2011/dec/14/complete-text-president-obamas-speech-fort-bragg-ar- 1713958/. 2 For some of the pertinent scholarship from political philosophy, see Gary J. Bass, “Jus Post Bellum,” Philosophy & Public Affairs 32, no. 4 (October 1, 2004): 384–412; Brian Orend, War and International Justice: A Kantian Perspective (Waterloo, Ontario, Canada: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2000); Brian Orend, “Jus Post Bellum,” Journal of Social Philosophy 31, no. 1 (Spring 2000): 117–137; Brian Orend, “Justice after War,” Ethics & International Affairs 16, no.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jus Post Bellum
    The Unjustness of the Current Incantation of Jus Post Bellum by Dan G. Cox us post bellum was originally conceived as an extension of modern just war theory. Specifically, it was aimed at examining the justness and morality of actions during war, jus in bello, in relationship to negotiations for peace in the post-war setting. Under the initial conception of Jjus post bellum, considerations of distinction of enemies from civilians, for example, takes on a more pointed meaning, as one has to calculate how much collateral damage is appropriate given the longer-term end-goal of successful and beneficial peace negotiations. Unfortunately, jus post bellum has recently been expanded to mean that the victor in the war is now responsible for the long-term well-being of the people it has defeated. This has led to a concerted outcry for post-war nation-building, which neither leads necessarily to successful negotiations, nor ensures a better or lasting peace. In fact, current conceptions of jus post bellum remove national interest from the equation altogether, replacing all military endeavors with one monolithic national interest—liberal imperialism.1 Further, current incantations of jus post bellum obviate the possibility of a punitive strike or punitive expedition, even though this might be exactly what is needed in certain cases to create a better peace than existed prior to conflict. This article is an exploration of the current incantation of jus post bellum. The concept of an incantation was chosen purposively, as proponents of jus post bellum are engaging in a dogmatic approach to war termination oblivious to the complexities and realities of conflict and, in fact, in violation of just war theory itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Cox, Abstract, the Injustice of the Current Incantation of Jus Post Bellum
    The Injustice of the Current Incantation of Jus Post Bellum Dan G. Cox, Ph. D., School of Advanced Military Studies, US Army, [email protected] 9137583319 Abstract: Jus post bellum was originally conceived as an extension of modern just war theory. Specifically, it was aimed at examining the justness and morality of actions during war, jus in bello, in relationship to negotiations for peace in the post-war setting. Under the initial conception of jus post bellum, considerations of distinction of enemies from civilians, for example, takes on a more pointed meaning as one has to calculate how much collateral damage, even if allowed for in just in bello, is appropriate given the longer-term end-goal of successful and beneficial peace negotiations. Unfortunately, jus post bellum has been expanded to mean that the victor in the war is now responsible for the well-being of the people and/or nation it has defeated. This has led to a concerted cry for post-war nation-building which neither leads necessarily to successful negotiations nor ensures a better or lasting peace. In fact, current conceptions of jus post bellum remove national interest from the equation altogether replacing all military endeavors with one monolithic national interest; liberal imperialism1. Further, current incantations of jus post bellum obviate the possibility of a punitive strike or punitive expedition even though this might be exactly what is needed in certain cases to create a better peace than existed prior to conflict. This paper will explore the genesis and evolution of the jus post bellum concept.
    [Show full text]
  • Peace and War
    Peace and War Christian Reflection A SERIES IN FAITH AND ETHICS BAYLOR UNIVERSITY GENERAL EDITOR Robert B. Kruschwitz ART EDITOR Heidi J. Hornik REVIEW EDITOR Norman Wirzba PRODUCTION ASSISTANT Julie Bolin DESIGNER Eric Yarbrough PUBLISHER The Center for Christian Ethics Baylor University One Bear Place #97361 Waco, TX 76798-7361 PHONE (254) 710-3774 TOLL-FREE (USA) (866) 298-2325 W E B S I T E www.ChristianEthics.ws E-MAIL [email protected] All Scripture is used by permission, all rights reserved, and unless otherwise indicated is from New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. ISSN 1535-8585 Christian Reflection is the ideal resource for discipleship training in the church. Multiple copies are obtainable for group study at $2.50 per copy. Worship aids and lesson materials that enrich personal or group study are available free on the website. Christian Reflection is published quarterly by The Center for Christian Ethics at Baylor University. Contributors express their considered opinions in a responsible manner. The views expressed are not official views of The Center for Christian Ethics or of Baylor University. The Center expresses its thanks to individuals, churches, and organizations, including the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, who provided financial support for this publication. © 2004 The Center for Christian Ethics at Baylor University All rights reserved Contents Introduction 8 Robert B. Kruschwitz War in the Old Testament 11 John A. Wood The War of the Lamb 18 Harry O. Maier Terrorist Enemies and Just War 27 William T.
    [Show full text]
  • INDIVIDUAL and NATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY to PROTECT Dr
    INDIVIDUAL AND NATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT Dr. Jack D. Kem “It is absolutely the responsibility of every U.S. service member, if they see inhumane treatment being conducted, to intervene to stop it.” GEN Peter Pace, 29 November 20051 ABSTRACT The "Responsibility to Protect," or R2P, as defined by the international community, is a sovereign obligation that relates directly to States to protect their citizens from genocide and mass atrocities. In the past decade, this "Responsibility to Protect" has extended to the international community when States fail to fulfill their obligation. R2P, therefore, is considered only at the "nation-state" level. This paper addresses how the concepts in R2P should also be considered as an individual obligation to intervene when instances of genocide or mass atrocities occur. The paper also compares and contrasts R2P with Just War Theory parallel concepts of Jus ad Bellum (as a nation-state concern) and Jus in Bello (as an individual concern). BACKGROUND On November 29, 2005, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Peter Pace conducted a press conference at the Pentagon. One of the key issues addressed at the press conference was the “growing reports of uniformed death squads” allegedly conducting assassinations and torture. These reports were dismissed as “hypothetical” by Secretary Rumsfeld. One reporter then asked a question “about excesses of the Interior Ministry, the Ministry of Defense, and that is in dealing with prisoners or in arresting people and how they're treated after they're arrested.” Acknowledging Iraq as sovereign country, he asked “…what is the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Just War Or Not: a Reassessment of the Korean War
    International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 4, No. 3, May 2014 Just War or Not: A Reassessment of the Korean War Hoeun Choi Abstract—The Korean War holds a significant place in the II. THE KOREAN WAR history of modern Korea. However, because it was a highly The Korean War is generally regarded in the West as a just political and ideological conflict, it has been difficult to assess its true nature in a more-balanced, less-biased manner; both North war [1]. War was clearly declared by a sovereign authority, and South Korea have argued for each side regarding the and it was also an act against aggression from the communist justness of the war. By reassessing the historical question of regime in North Korea. No other intentions seemed to exist “Was the Korean War a just war?” this paper attempts to behind the goal of protecting democracy from communism. redefine the just-or-not question, since such a narrow viewpoint Questioning this justification for the war is an unofficial does not allow the forgotten parts of the Korean War to be taboo in contemporary South Korea [2]. The question of revealed. By applying the just war theory and reassessing historical facts from a more historical perspective, this paper whether the Korean War was just or not has received shows how unjust elements existed in both Koreas during the relatively less attention than some of the other wars the Korean War. Following demonstrations, this paper further United States had fought, such as the Vietnam War. suggests that it is more important and even necessary to Moreover, the Korean War was the first war in which various consider wider perspectives and more historical factors in order nations fought under the flag of the United Nations, which to assess this major historical event from a more balanced took legitimate steps to fight against communist forces.
    [Show full text]
  • AJ Muste's Theology
    ! A.J. Muste’s Theology: Tracing the Ideas that Shaped the Man Jeffrey D. Meyers M.A. Thesis Earlham School of Religion April 16, 2012 ! Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter 1: A Short Biography 4 Chapter 2: The Theological Task 14 Chapter 3: Mysticism and the Inner Life 22 Chapter 4: The Social Gospel 34 Chapter 5: The Way of Love, the Way of the Cross 43 Chapter 6: Theological Anthropology 61 Chapter 7: Ecclesiology 81 Chapter 8: Eschatology: The Kingdom of God 101 Conclusions 115 Annotated Bibliography 121 Appendix 1a: Books Owned By Muste 150 Appendix 1b: Books Owned By Muste 158 Appendix 2: Authors Cited By Muste 176 Appendix 3: Books Assigned By Muste 191 Introduction Historians study the Reverend Abraham Johannes Muste primarily for his shaping of the labor movement of the 1920s and 1930s, his work for peace from the mid 1930s through the 1960s, and his involvement in laying the foundations of the Civil Rights Movement.1 His leadership in these movements often gained him national attention––Time Magazine once labeled him “the No. 1 U.S. Pacifist.”2 Although most attempts at understanding this complex man have noted the influence of his Christian faith, few scholars have explored its true depth. The religious foundations of his life, thought, and work were often an embarrassment to those he worked with and those who admired him. In avoiding Muste’s faith, his contemporaries and scholars alike have missed the ways his theology undergirded and motivated his life and work. At heart, Muste was a theologian.
    [Show full text]
  • Christian Pacifism and Just-War Tenets: How Do They Diverge?
    Theological Studies 47 (1986) CHRISTIAN PACIFISM AND JUST-WAR TENETS: HOW DO THEY DIVERGE? RICHARD B. MILLER Indiana University ECENT STUDIES in Christian ethics have uncovered a "point of R convergence" between pacifist convictions and just-war tenets. Al­ though it is easy to assume that just-war ideas and pacifism are wholly incompatible approaches to the morality of warfare, James Childress argues that pacifists and just-war theorists actually share a common starting point: a moral presumption against the use of force. Childress uses W. D. Ross's language of prima-facie duties to show how pacifism and just-war thought converge. The duty not to kill or injure others (nonmaleficence) is a duty within each approach. For the pacifist, non- maleficence is an absolute duty admitting of no exceptions. For just-war theorists, nonmaleficence is a prima-facie duty, that is, a duty that is usually binding but may be overridden in exceptional circumstances— particularly when innocent life and human rights are at stake. Prima- facie duties are not absolute, but place the burden of proof on those who wish to override them when they conflict with other duties, "in virtue of the totality of... ethically relevant circumstances."1 War poses just those exceptional circumstances in which the duty of nonmaleficence may be overridden. In this way Childress both highlights the point of contact between pacifism and just-war tenets and reconstructs the essential logic of the jus ad bellum. To override a prima-facie duty, however, is not to abandon it. Such duties continue to function in the situation or in the subsequent course of action.
    [Show full text]
  • Jus Ad Bellum and Jus in Bello in the Lebanese War Enzo Cannizzaro* Enzo Cannizzaro Is Professor of International Law at the University of Macerata
    Volume 88 Number 864 December 2006 Contextualizing proportionality: jus ad bellum and jus in bello in the Lebanese war Enzo Cannizzaro* Enzo Cannizzaro is Professor of international law at the University of Macerata. Abstract This article analyses the role and content of proportionality under contemporary international law governing the use of force, with a view to clarifying the legal framework governing the conduct of the parties to an armed conflict. In the system of jus ad bellum, protection is primarily granted to the interest of the attacked state in repelling the attack; the other competing interests are considered only to curtail the choice of the means to be employed in order to achieve that aim. Conversely, in the system of jus in bello there is by definition no prevailing interest, but instead a variety of interests and values which are entitled to equal protection of the law and must be balanced against each other. The existence of two distinct normative systems, with distinct standards of legality applicable to the same conduct, does not as a rule give rise to major problems. The legality of recourse to force is measured against the proportionality of self-defence, whereas individual actions would have to conform to the requirement of proportionality in jus in bello. However, beyond the large area in which these two standards overlap, there might be situations in which the strict application of the jus ad bellum standard makes it impossible to achieve the aims of jus in bello. In these cases, the proportionality test under jus in bello must be regarded as part of the proportionality test under jus ad bellum.
    [Show full text]
  • State Sovereignty Discourse and the Just War Tradition: Assessing Colombia’S 2008 Cross-Border Raid Into Ecuador and Its Foreign Policy Implications
    i State sovereignty discourse and the Just War Tradition: Assessing Colombia’s 2008 cross-border raid into Ecuador and its foreign policy implications Kim Refshauge Master of Arts (Research) in International Studies, School of International Studies, University of Technology Sydney 2017 ii CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP This thesis is the result of a research candidature at the University of Technology, Sydney as in fulfilment of the requirements for a Master’s degree. I certify that the work in this thesis has not previously been submitted for a different degree. I also certify that the thesis has been written by me. Any help that I have received in my research work and the preparation of the thesis itself has been acknowledged. In addition, I certify that all information sources and literature used are indicated in the thesis. Signature of Student: Date: 27-July-2017 iii iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I am grateful to my supervisor, Associate Professor Jeff Browitt, for his unwavering support and dedicated supervision over the last two years. I would also like to extend my deepest gratitude to my parents for their encouragement. This thesis would not have been possible without them. v vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ....................................................................................... vii INTRODUCTION: ............................................................................... 1 Military interventions similar to Operation Phoenix: ........................... 2 Typology of justifications for military interventions .........................
    [Show full text]
  • Just War and Pacifism
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Institute of Pastoral Studies: Faculty Publications and Other Works Faculty Publications 3-2003 Christian Traditions of Peace: Just War and Pacifism M. Therese Lysaught Loyola University Chicago, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/ips_facpubs Part of the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Lysaught, M. Therese. Christian Traditions of Peace: Just War and Pacifism. Catechist Magazine, , : 50-54, 2003. Retrieved from Loyola eCommons, Institute of Pastoral Studies: Faculty Publications and Other Works, This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Institute of Pastoral Studies: Faculty Publications and Other Works by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. © Bayard Inc., 2003. Discipleship and the Moral Life Christian Traditions of Peace: Just War and Pacifism “But I say to you that hear, love your enemies, do “All these factors force us to undertake a completely good to those who hate you, bless those who curse fresh reappraisal of war” ( Pastoral Constitution on you, pray for those who abuse you. To him who the Church in the Modern World , Second Vatican strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and Council, #80). from him who takes away your coat, do not withhold even your shirt….Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful” (Lk 6:27-36). 50 MARCH 2003 • CATECHIST By M.
    [Show full text]
  • Attaining Post-Conflict Peace Using the Jus Post Bellum Concept
    religions Article Attaining Post-Conflict Peace Using the jus post bellum Concept Albert W. Klein 1,2,3 1 Department of Political Science, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45208, USA; [email protected] 2 Fellow, The Center for Cyber Strategy and Policy, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221, USA 3 Faculty Fellow, Ohio Cyber Range Institute, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45208, USA Received: 27 January 2020; Accepted: 1 April 2020; Published: 8 April 2020 Abstract: To attain peace after state-on-state war, there must be a belligerent occupation to establish control and security of a defeated state—but that is not enough. There is the concept of jus post bellum concerning the vanquished, which is critically necessary in practice, yet insufficiently developed and understood. Providing the history and tentatively trying to determine the elements that are contained in this concept are the present article’s purpose. Tracing the concept from the earliest Christian writers to the more secular present-day authors will aid in the prospective application of jus post bellum. Scholars, military officers, statesmen, religious leaders, and humanitarians need to understand and accept the basic elements of the concept. A clear understanding of the largely religious history behind these elements should assist in their acceptance and future practical application, once these are agreed upon. Keywords: Just war; jus post bellum; Laws of War; Laws of Peace; Just War Theory 1. Introduction In my view, attaining a just peace after state-on-state wars requires a belligerent occupation and the application of the concept of jus post bellum.
    [Show full text]
  • Listening to a Discussion
    Leaven Volume 10 Issue 2 Searching for Peace and Justice Article 11 1-1-2002 Listening to a Discussion The Fellows of the Center for International Peace and Justice Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation The Fellows of the Center for International Peace and Justice (2002) "Listening to a Discussion," Leaven: Vol. 10 : Iss. 2 , Article 11. Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol10/iss2/11 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]. The Fellows of the Center for International Peace and Justice: Listening to a Discussion Listening to a Discussion THE FELLOWS OF THE CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND JUSTICE e thought it would be good for our readers to listen in while the contributors for this issue engaged in a dialogue. Each writer below gives a brief response to the thoughts of his fel- W lows. This not only will allow readers to think through the difficult issues raised in this issue of Leaven, but also models the graciousness of Christian love that we should extend to brothers who disagree with us on important issues. THE EDITORS Concerning Other Roads to Peace and Justice Guy R. Vanderpool Christian realism, pacifism, anarchism, and pragmatism have much to commend them, for all com- mand the pilgrim "to imitate and serve" Jesus "and him alone."! The realist position quite properly urges Christians to enter politics and government, for to these spheres they are sure to bring correct perspectives of important issues.
    [Show full text]