Church unity and the necessity of nonviolence

A lack of unity discredits the witness and work of the church for the world. This truth has long been emphasized by those concerned for the oneness of the church. However, the fragmentation that is the most conspicuous and damaging the church's mission is the result of neither doctrinal differences nor organizational incompatibility among denominations. Rather, the church's sanction of war and the participation of its members in various forms of violence is the most glaring and harmful expression of disunity. No doctrinal consensus or restructure of church organizations will lead a unity capable of witnessing the gospel of God's grace the whole world apart from a repudiation of war and violence on the part of the church throughout the globe. According the constitution of the World Council of Churches, the purpose of ecumenical efforts is to call the churches the goal of visible unity in one faith and in one eucharistic fellowship expressed in worship and in common life in Christ, and advance toward that unity in order that the world believe. In its unity, the church not only focuses its missional efforts but also more faithfully expresses the reality of the reconciliation intended by God in Christ. So long as the church does not disavow Christian participation in warfare, especially, though not exclusively, insofar as Christians might attack Christians, witness-bearing unity will elude the church. In ecumenical conversations and in official statements, the importance of nonviolence the unity of the church has received some recognition, but even these conversations and statements provide an occasion for fissures in the church come the surface because of differences relating matters of war and peace in the various traditions. Because of this wide diversity among the churches, wrote Marlin Miller, any impetus toward common recognition that peace witness belongs the faithful church's calling in the world encounters resistance even at the initial point of raising the question of the church's peace witness. (1) Explicit affirmation of the permissibility and even the responsibility of Christians participate in wars was given confessional status in some traditions. For instance, is stated within the Augsburg Confession (1530) that it is taught among us ... that Christians without sin ... punish evildoers with the sword, engage in just wars, [or] serve as soldiers.... (2) Likewise, one of the Church of England's Thirty-nine Articles (1571) reads, It is lawful for Christian men, at the commaundement of the Magistrate, weare weapons and seine in the warres. (3) The Westminster Confession (1646), speaking of Christian magistrates, states that they may law fully, now under the New Testament, wage war upon just and necessary occasion. (4) Within ecumenical circles, there has been recognition of the problematic nature of war insofar as the unity of the church is concerned. The First Assembly of the World Council of Churches in its opening statement regarding international disorder stated, We are one in proclaiming all [that war] is contrary the will of God. (5) However, that unambiguous declaration was followed by the recognition that Christians have adopted several postures regarding Among them were (1) that Christians should not participate in modern warfare of mass destruction, (2) that Christians should defend by force national institutions of law and order since no effective comparable supernational institutions exist, and (3) that Christians are called make an unqualified witness against war and refuse military service. The statement further affirmed that the churches must teach the duty of love and prayer for the enemy in time of war and of reconciliation between victor and vanquished after the war. (6) This statement's acknowledgment of the differing perspectives found among Christians is in keeping with the ecumenical commitment unity in diversity. …