Pacifism

The purpose of Christian engagement in politics is not to eradicate injustice and evil but to express love towards people and to testify to the goodness of Christ

Some America First Republicans are nearly indistinguishable from the standard fare retreaters we were served from the “Blame America First” leftists of the Cold War.

The BBC should bring back the skepticism of pacifism that Doctor Who used to have.

This week the editors discuss Debra Erickson’s article about why the Russia-Ukraine War is not World War III, an exchange about pacifism and the just war tradition, and a 75-year-old article about Easter and the resurrection.

I appreciate Michael McKoy’s recent “What Does Pacifism Have to Say About Ukraine?” But I remain unimpressed by the pacifist view.

Pacifism argues that the only means of breaking the cycles of violence is to recognize the short-term and long-term devastation of war, examine the decisions and dynamics that perpetuate these cycles, and make the tough decisions necessary to reject violence and ensure peace.

At the Christianity and National Security Conference, Paul D. Miller reviewed the history of how Baptists have thought about war, peace, and the just war tradition.

Melissa Florer-Bixler is angry, and she wants her fellow Mennonites to get angry, too. At least, that is the professed premise of her book, “How to Have an Enemy: Righteous Anger and the Work of Peace.”

Advocates of Integral Disarmament believe the weapons of war are inherently evil. Their consequent prescriptions leave the innocent defenseless