I don’t use the word “pacifism” when speaking or singing across the country.  I have to touch on what it means to be a peace maker since my last album was based on that idea and seven others that make up the beatitudes from Matthew 5:1-12.  I used that word, “pacifism”, early on, when that album was new, and I regretted it. 

I was promptly threatened in the lobby of a church in Colorado Springs by two Christians serving in the Air Force and sent livid hate mail as well.  But I didn’t stop using the word because I was frightened away from it.  I stopped using it because doing so stopped dialogue.  It is a word that flips a hate switch inside the patriot or any other other-minded Christian who associates it with hippies and Jane Fonda, Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon.  It’s a worn out word defined for us by those who’ve overused it over the years.  When it spills from my mouth, regardless of what precedes it or follows it, my audience, whether one person or a thousand, thinks they have me figured out as a “liberal” or a democrat” or an “unrealistic pansy long haired hippie” and they no longer listen or think about how being at peace with God through Jesus affects our view of war and peace.  Threats and hatred, at the very least defensiveness, replaces sane conversation and rational questioning.  Conversation is dead.

So now I don’t use any one word to describe my theology of war and peace.  I don’t call myself anything but Christian.  Instead, I do something much more subversive and conversation preserving.  I simply say there has always been a tremendous amount of conflict in the world – across bedrooms, sanctuaries, boardrooms and borders.  head nod in agreement.  And then I quote Jesus – every word He ever said about enemies, loving them, turning cheeks, and on and on.  I don’t speak out against the war we’re in.  I don’t mention specific countries.  I don’t talk about soldiers or soldiering.  I just end by saying Jesus blesses the peace maker who loves his enemy the way Christ loved us when we were His.  That starts conversation.  And it’s killed the threats.

Conversation, more than preaching, book writing, or any other kind of one way communication is what I believe can provoke Christians in any country to reexamine their theology of war and peace and discover how truly central the involved issues are to following the Jesus of the Sermon on the Mount and the cross.

So, for the person who asked via e-mail why I’m posting about Hauerwas here, that’s the best answer I can give:  Non-violence is central to my understanding of what it means to be Christian, Hauerwas is discussing and fielding questions and I believe that is a great way to learn from him – better than a sermon, and lastly, here we can pick up the conversation and ask questions and disagree and learn.  This is our chance to reason together after listening to Hauerwas’ reasoning on Christian non-violence.

So, let’s get on with it.  In Part 3, Hauerwas answers two questions I’ve fielded a lot over the last year: Of course you say you’re against war NOW; but what would you have said if you lived in Poland while Hitler was on the march?  AND People out there want to take down America and stop freedom; what are we supposed to do about that?

Hope his answers provoke.  Let’s dialogue.

Read Part 1 here and part two here.