Praising Peace, Yet Glorifying War
What Are the Consequences?
IT WAS December 1914. In Europe, World War I was raging. Troops faced one another in the trenches, with a no-man’s-land between them. But, then, on Christmas Day, December 25, something remarkable occurred.
The book The War in the Trenches shows a photograph of the opposing combatants in friendly association, with the caption: “British and German troops fraternize, Christmas, 1914.” The writer, Alan Lloyd, notes that the troops “actually met in No Man’s Land to exchange souvenirs.
“‘It was like the interval between rounds in a boxing match,’ reported a participant. . . . ‘Everyone was talking, laughing and souvenir hunting.’”
Why this recess from fighting? Because these British and German soldiers had been taught that Christ, the Prince of Peace, had been born on December 25. And had not angels sung at his birth, “Upon earth peace among men of goodwill”? (Luke 2:14) Surely, then, it made no sense for professed followers of Christ to kill one another at such a time!
Yet, peace at Christmas was not favored by all. “As a second Christmas settled on the Western Front,” Lloyd explained, there was “a further outbreak of fraternization in No Man’s Land, despite the orders against such behaviour. At least two officers who took part were court-martialled.”
The Position of the Churches
How did the churches feel about their members going off to war against fellow believers in other lands? Well, at Christmastime clergymen parroted the message of peace that the angels delivered at Christ’s birth, and they praised Jesus as the Prince of Peace. (Isaiah 9:6) Yet, they did not object when their members killed persons of the very same religion in the opposing trenches, whether it was on Christmas or any other day of the year!
Church historian Roland H. Bainton reports on the situation when the United States entered World War I: “American churchmen of all faiths were never so united with each other and with the mind of the country. This was a holy war. Jesus was dressed in khaki and portrayed sighting down a gun barrel. The Germans were Huns. To kill them was to purge the earth of monsters.”—Christian Attitudes Toward War and Peace, pages 209, 210.
Yes, the churches paid lip service to peace. But at the same time pulpits became recruiting stations for the nation’s war effort. British Brigadier General Frank P. Crozier said of the situation during World War I: “The Christian Churches are the finest blood-lust creators which we have, and of them we made free use.”
That the position of the churches was indeed hypocritical was acknowledged by the late Protestant clergyman Harry Emerson Fosdick. He admitted: “Our Western history has been one war after another. We have bred men for war, trained men for war; we have glorified war; we have made warriors our heroes and even in our churches we have put the battle flags . . . With one corner of our mouth we have praised the Prince of Peace and with the other we have glorified war.”
The situation did not change during World War II. Please read the New York Times article reproduced on this page that appeared during the first month of that war. It reinforces what Friedrich Heer, a Roman Catholic professor of history at Vienna University, later acknowledged in his book God’s First Love:
“In the cold facts of German history, the Cross and the swastika came ever closer together, until the swastika proclaimed the message of victory from the towers of German cathedrals, swastika flags appeared round altars and Catholic and Protestant theologians, pastors, churchmen and statesmen welcomed the alliance with Hitler.”—Page 247.
The Consequences
One consequence of the churches’ wholehearted support of their nation’s wars is that Christianity is viewed by millions in non-Christian lands as a warmongering religion, and they want nothing to do with it. That there is substance to their view is evident not only in the churches’ support of past wars but even in their present attitudes toward war. The Christian Century reports:
“A 20-year survey of attitudes toward war reveals that Christians in the U.S., Canada and West Germany tend to look upon war more favorably than do non-Christians. . . . According to the study, within the Christian community of these countries those who regard themselves as strict followers of the Christian faith are more inclined to an attitude approving war than are those of a more liberal attitude.”—December 31, 1980, page 1289.
How do you suppose the position of the churches on the matter of war has even affected many within so-called Christian nations? Reo M. Christenson, a professor of political science, discussed this in The Christian Century. “That Christians on the one hand espouse the faith of the gentle Savior while on the other they warmly support religious or nationalistic wars,” he wrote, “has gone far toward damaging the faith and promoting the kind of cynicism about religion that has been pervasive among thinking people for centuries.”—May 25, 1983.
Such cynicism about religion at times is expressed in a piercingly effective way. For example, last year when a Marine would not go to Lebanon because he was a Muslim and would not kill another Muslim, columnist Mike Royko made some telling remarks. He wrote that the Marine “was trying to goof up the ancient rules and traditions of warfare,” since Christians have never “been squeamish about waging wars on other Christians.” He added: “If they had been, most of the liveliest wars in Europe would never have occurred.”
Pointing to facts of history, Royko continued: “Germany is loaded with Christians of all denominations. But every so often it feels the need to shoot its way into France, Poland and other Christian nations. France, in its Napoleonic heyday, didn’t hesitate to stomp all over other European Christians.
“If anything, faith sometimes helped get their blood pressure pumped up, although it’s doubtful that Christ intended his message to be used that way. . . . If everybody thought the way that Marine corporal does, World Wars I and II, which set the all-time records for Christians killing Christians, could never have occurred. . . .
“Actually,” Royko added mockingly, “there are benefits to waging war on people of the same faith. For one thing, if you’re taken prisoner and die, you have a good chance of receiving a Christian burial, which is always nicer than being tossed out with the leftovers. And on religious holidays, the prison guards might be warmed by the spirit of the day and give you one less kick.”
There is no question about the sarcasm of this commentary. But can you deny its truth? And do you not agree that the churches deserve such ridicule for their hypocritical pretense of representing the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ?
‘But we cannot live by Christ’s teachings in this modern world,’ the clergy may protest. Yet, considering such objection, Professor Christenson wrote in the earlier-mentioned article: “I do not believe it is amiss to apply what we know about Jesus’ teachings and example to war—especially to modern war.
“Can anyone seriously conceive of Jesus hurling hand grenades at his enemies, using a machine gun, manipulating a flamethrower, dropping nuclear bombs or launching an ICBM which would kill or cripple thousands of mothers and children? The question is so absurd that it scarcely merits an answer. If Jesus could not do this and be true to his character, then how can we do it and be true to him?”
When you honestly face up to such questions, you can see why the religion editor of The Toronto Star wrote on a recent Christmas Eve: “It is a mockery of Christmas not to see that the present, totally insane nuclear build-up by the United States and the Soviet Union is a blasphemy against Christ and humanity of the most heinous kind.”
At the same time, the problems facing this world are admittedly complex. Does this mean that true peace on earth will never be realized? Is fulfillment of the angelic announcement about ‘peace on earth’ really only a dream? Or is there a sure basis for believing that people of all races and nationalities can live together in peace, without ever again experiencing the horrors of war?
[Box on page 5]
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Monday, September 25, 1939.
German Soldiers Rallied by Churches
Protestant and Catholic Exhort to Reich Victory and Just Peace
Wireless to The New York Times
FRANKFORT-ON-THE-MAIN, Germany, Sept. 24—Periodicals of the German Protestant and Catholic Churches are now publishing many exhortive articles explaining the duties of soldiers fighting in the defense of their country and admonishing the German soldiers to fight in the spirit of Saint Michael for a German victory and a just peace.
The archangel is shown, brandishing a battlesword and piercing a dragon with a holy lance, on the front page of Catholic papers.
In the western and southern German Catholic dioceses, the clergy headed by the Archbishop and Bishops, are actively engaged in work for the welfare of refugees evacuated from the western frontier districts. Many cloisters have been transformed into hospitals and the monks and nuns are working under the direction of the Red Cross.
The Catholic Bishops of Germany have issued a pastoral letter stating:
“In this decisive hour we admonish our Catholic soldiers to do their duty in obedience to the Fuehrer and be ready to sacrifice their whole individuality.
“We appeal to the faithful to join in ardent prayers that the Divine Providence of God Almighty may lead this war to blessed success and peace for our fatherland and nations.”
Each Bishop in addition has issued a special message to his own diocese, including the Bishop of Rottenburg in Wuerttemberg, who was expelled from his diocese last year for refusing to vote in a national Socialist election.
Cardinal Archbishop Bertram, head of the German Episcopal Congregation, has similarily issued a patriotic message to his flock urging that all “be strong in your heart, all you who confide in God Almighty.”
[Picture on page 4]
Clergymen praise the Prince of Peace, yet bless war
[Credit Line]
El Comercio, Quito, Ecuador
[Pictures on page 6]
“If Jesus could not do this and be true to his character, then how can we do it and be true to him?”
[Credit Line]
U.S. Army photo
[Picture Credit Line on page 3]
From U.S. Army photos