Definition of nonviolence
I found this definition of nonviolence in Brennan Manning's book Lion and Lamb and thought I would share it with ya'll. Here goes-
"The Christian response to evil-to aggression-is resistance, of course, but nonviolent resistance of love, prayer, and accepted suffering. When Christians do anything else, they have parted company with Jesus. Nonviolence is the expression of a faith that the greatest power in human history is the forward movement of love. Nonviolence is as realistic as Jesus Himself, and it is one with the Cross of Christ's victory over evil. The question of whether or not nonviolent resistance "works" should be referred not so much to the gain of an immediate victory,as to the transformation of history from within by the converging forces of love. Gandhi wrote that "Jesus lived and died in vain if he did not teach us to regulate the whole of life by the eternal law of love." (page 80)
I thought it was interesting.:)
I liked the quote so much that I plan to search for that book on my next trip to the library.
where's the beef?
I hate to split hairs and I'm not looking to be adversarial, or start a thread-war...but I do not find a definition of non-violence in that, I find sweet theological confusion.
Is it equating aggression with evil? All aggression is certainly not evil.
It's nice, it's inspirational to some extent, but in my humble --even if annoying-- opinion, it does not offer anything close to a definition of nonviolence.
I always ask Soulforcers to think DEEP about this subject. A Hallmark card answer is not going to serve us in the struggle.
peace and love :love:
Rev-this was one man's opinion about what nonviolence is. you are welcome to disagree. I like it, but you don't have to like it or agree with it. Split hairs if you want. No big deal. We're all friends here. :D
Lydia-I love Brennan Manning. I think you would like his other books, Ragamuffin Gospel, The Signature of Jesus, The Wisdom of Tenderness, to name a few. Ragamuffin Gospel is my favorite. :)
Ragamuffin Gospel revolutionized the way I look at the Christian life. I was raised Southern Baptist and it made me look a lot at how I was raised and how it really limited how I see God. I have sinced learned that God is too big to be put in the tiny little boxes we humans tend to place Him in. The book was fabulous.:love:
split ends = bad hair day
Thanks, pnn, for taking my analysis in the spirit in which it was intended. We are all friends, on the same side and want the same results: equality under the law and to confront religious homophobia. :pray:
There is a great discussion on the history and types of non-violence here:
It was interesting to me that this source says Gandhi was influenced by the Sermon on the Mount.
Wouldn't it be interesting to see what would happen if we could get a couple thousand (or even a couple hundred) committed LGBT couples to stand in line for a marriage license, day after day, week after week, in one of the major metropolitan areas.
This is another interesting tidbit:
"In 1989, thirteen nations comprising 1,695,000,000 people experienced nonviolent revolutions that succeeded beyond anyone's wildest expectations ... If we add all the countries touched by major nonviolent actions in our century (the Philippines, South Africa ... the independence movement in India ...) the figure reaches 3,337,400,000, a staggering 65% of humanity! All this in the teeth of the assertion, endlessly repeated, that nonviolence doesn't work in the 'real' world. "
(Walter Wink, as quoted by Susan Ives in a 2001 talk)
Comic Relief Is More Than Pit Humour......
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I am reminded of one of my favourite major theological seminary refectory mottos " FIDEM SCIT ( CICERO NOT KIKERO )
LATIN FOR (S)HE KNOWS THE FAITH.........
Here are some really great resources on noviolence.
Nonviolence- The Only Hope (Article by Arun Gandhi)
Common Peace (formerly the Center for the Advancement of Nonviolence)
Articles on nonviolence
This last one is an online flash course in nonviolence from the King Center in Atlanta. It includes past movements of nonviolence, the principles and the steps of nonviolence and how to make nonviolence a blueprint for your life.
Nonviolence or Nonexitence
I saved all those links, they are very helpful to me.
The last one is somewhat familliar. When you enter the MLK Center for Nonviolent Social Change, painted on the museum wall in front so that it's the first thing you see, is a quote from Dr King:
"The choice is not between nonviolence and violence; the choice is between nonviolence and nonexistence."
not righting this is violent
From Arun Ghandi
"just as we are required to create a whole culture of violence around us to practice violence we need to create a culture of nonviolence around us to practice nonviolence". ...Uh... say what? We are not to indulge a bit of violence for the sake of education or experience, we are required to create a whole culture of violence around us to practice violence... Please explain this to me... If it is a reference to a simple dualistic belief in balance, the yin yan push me pull you explanation of necessary negativity, I get it. If you can elaborate from there, please do...
"The fact is it is not violence that is our true nature but anger, the fuel that generates violence... the culture of violence is based on the need to control by fear" ...Anger? Why? So, its natural to be steaming, on edge and driven to relentlessly resist?... Fear is a tool we can control with, it is easily abused, dangerous and efficient. It some times is justified, warning of pain, but It is by no means the only tool, the best tool or by any stretch, needed.
"He told us anger is like electricity – just as powerful and useful when used intelligently, but as destructive and deadly when abused." ..Again, anger at what? Lack of control?
"However, the intention should not be simply to get the anger out of one’s system but to find an equitable solution to the problem that caused the anger. A problem nipped in the bud saves a lot of grief."...Gee, ya don't say.
"passive violence: Hate, predjudice, opression, name-calling, teasing, looking down on people, speaking to people impolitely,...and the millions of other ways in which our actions or even inaction hurt people." ...damn, criticizing this is violent. Ya got me Ghandi... but so is not criticizing it... where's a rock to crawl under... (by the way, a tree falling unwitnessed in a forest is noisy)
"Passive violence is, therefore, the fuel that ignites physical violence" ...we got short fuses, hair-triggers, no clue why and got a culture of violence to create to play in. er, practice in.
"In a world steeped in the culture of violence justice has come to mean revenge – an eye for an eye, Gandhiji said, only makes the whole world blind. In a culture of nonviolence justice would mean reformation by recognizing that those who do wrong do it out of ignorance or attenuating circumstances. Punishing the person instead of resolving the problem only aggravates physical violence in the form of crime and violence." ...out of ignorance. One of the Greatest false justifications to dull this planet... Nothing but an excuse. The last bad thing you did, you knew better. Thats what made it bad. True ignorance is innocent and we are neither... Restraing a violent person, how ever tenderly, will feel like punishment to them. Vengence isn't ours to dole out. The responsibility to redeem trumps it...
Here's another way to look at it: Violence is intentional destructive force. Like all things, it can be used for good or bad. It is a desperate tool, intended to be a last resort. ... I do not believe our true nature is of violence, depravity, evil or some alien anger. I believe we are inherently weak and the anger at that perhaps is where this text stops. They are two very different things. Anger, like violence, has its place. At my core is ridiculous.
I am boggled by the thoughts here and dismayed by how little I agree with them at the outset, and in crucial, (dare I say, Fundemental) ways.. I presume looking further into the MLK lessons may clarify some of these statements, but I do not seek out thier understanding, I seek yours... Any help?
(I do apologize for any abruptness. I have been fighting an ulcer the past few days and haven't been in the mood for small talk. (or any talk) I just couldn't let this thread slide buy. My questions are done with genuine respect for all you guys.)
Sorry all, I cannot let this drop. I can, but I won't, as it will rise up again. It is a deal breaker, that super glue sticky thread and I may not belong here.:(
I'd like to go back and touch-up/reword some of my remarks, but that would serve only to pollyannatize the approach, not lesson the severity of my disagreements...
Is Passive Aggression An Expression Of Nonviolence?
My brothers and sisters,
This conversational thread has as many themes as the sides of a snowflake.:rolleyes:
God (or whatever Theistic Being word) has been used by every national leader as supporting their causes against all others. Christians have been in trouble since Constantine let our spiritual ancestors in the halls of power, rather than satisfy the cravings of hungry lions. We have had Christian Crusades and Islamic Jihads.
Jesus cried. Jesus taught. Jesus admonished. Jesus chastised. Jesus was even violent in the Temple with those who were defiling His Father's House.
It has been my delight to travel extensively, including the Indian sub-continent. Hinduism, with its caste system, and its ordered society, is very informative when we discuss M. K. Ghandi.
Yes, Ghandi preached non-violence, but as an educated man and natural politician, he realised that certain acts COULD induce violent reactions from allies and opponents alike. The fact that his beloved India was forced to divide into first two nations, and eventually three nations, must be factored into the discussion. At what point does naivete of possible results inform the facts? The British Raj had social and political roots....but it had economic and religious factors as well that Ghandi played like a rare violin.
I assume that we eventually must speak about " justifiable anger " and " justification for peaceful assembly that can become self defence."
Make no mistake, brothers and sisters, there are world governments and leaders who want to exterminate all societal elements that they deem unacceptable. Not since the 1930's have we seen such a world shift to the Right and Extreme Right. World political and economic blocs are solidifying.
All of us must answer a crucial question: If they started to corral us all first into ghettoes and then into camps, would you go quietly, or would you resist and die standing up rather than lying down? Would you scream LIFE, LIFE, LIFE as they were successful in taking yours?
We North Americans have lived without war (US civil war 1861-65) and have a disbelief that the tragedies and horrors of Europe, Asia and Africa could never occur here.
Do you believe it?
I have just bumped 2 older threads up to the top of the page because we've had some previous conversations along the lines of what you just asked. While I'm open to a more current talk about the same things, I thought the older threads would also bring you up to speed on what transpired here before you joined us. Maybe a launch pad for a new conversation. As of this moment, those 2 new threads are right up at the top of the page . . .can't say how long they'll stay there! They have titles along the lines of, Blah blah blah Dominionism, and something or other Bush and compassion. Happy reading. :)
I'm not sure what my definition of non-violence is, but I just try to use the golden rule of "Do unto others as you would have done unto you" as my guideline. I'm still learning - thanks everyone for the links!
Great websites Crozier - I hadn't visited them before. Some of those quotes - whoa! Nice case of the heebie jeebies on a quiet Friday evening.
Very accurate term, theocratic right - I'll use it.
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:20 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.