Talking through images...

Jesus and Nonviolence: A Third Way

The book, ‘Jesus and Nonviolence’ reminds me of a particular episode in the history of Korea, which is the thirty-six year Japanese colonial period (August, 29, 1910 ~ August, 15, 945). The book promotes nonviolence; in my country, the independence movement of Korea was accomplished by not only in a nonviolent way but also with violence. The independence of Korea is not an accomplished fact to me. Actually, the violent independence movement required the power of other countries. Some groups allied with the Soviet Union and some groups allied with the U.S. Consequently, the independence of Korea was gained through the involvement of allied powers, not by Korean stakes. In the end Korea was divided into two countries. What if Korea had used nonviolent revolution for independence? Would it have worked?
The book opens with claiming that nonviolent revolution works, citing cases of successful nonviolent revolutions.
Although the book claims that nonviolent revolution works, nonviolence is not easily accepted because of its negative connotations. However, the book points out that the negative view on nonviolence is caused by misuse of the term, “Nonviolence.” Most Christians understand “Nonviolence” as the absence of conflict without struggle for justice.1 Also, the term “Reconciliation” should refer not only to the reduction of conflict, but also to the power to bring justice.2 Corrected, the terms can generate the proper questions for bringing justice. As Christians who want justice, when we encounter absolute violence, how should we respond to it?
Fortunately the book offers three options to respond to evil, which are flight, fight, and face. In general, the respond to violence is flight or fight. “Flight” refers to a passivity that means, “Do not resist evil and submit” in order to avoid worse violence. “Fight” refers to violent opposition such as armed revolt and revenge.  “Face” refers to the third way of militant nonviolence articulated by Jesus.3
 The third way of Jesus has many differences from submission and violent opposition. First of all, the third way includes creativity that takes enemies by surprise by an unexpected response. According to Matthew 5:38-41, Jesus teaches creative responses to evil such as to turn the other cheek (when the enemy hits the right cheek), and going another mile for a person who want us to go one mile. This creativity causes enemies to lose their will to practice violence. Self-motivation is another difference. The self-motivation of Jesus’ third way is hunger for justice not for reaction against evil. Thus, the evildoer is not our enemy. Actually, there is no enemy. There are only victims of violence. Therefore, Christians regard their enemy as the object of love. Consequently, the evildoer exposes the injustice of the system and recognizes that the evildoer also is the victim of this system. Therefore, the third way of Jesus claims not only the humanity and dignity of Christians but also the evildoer’s.  
The third way of Jesus appears in the rules of nonviolent community action. In the book, Saul Alinsky’s thirteen rules for action are good examples to be developed for today’s world. In his rules, the most important thing is to construct a just society, together. Also, the book adds one rule, which is to not to adopt a strategy that you would not want your opponents to use against you.4 When we practice nonviolence, our heart should be pure. Nonviolence should not be a tactical method in violence.
Also, the third way of Jesus not only works for political and social struggle, but also costs less than violence. The book provides examples, which show the third way of Jesus is less costly than the violence seen in such places as India and Algeria, Poland and Argentina, and Czechoslovakia and Hungary. Although nonviolence is effective and far less costly than violence, many people prefer violence. Honestly, if I had lived in the Japanese colonial period, I would be against Japan. However, as a Christian, I should not be against my enemies.  
    Indeed, there are radical foundations for Christians who follows the third way of Jesus. First of all, Jesus’ way is founded on the love of enemies. Actually, this foundation can be interpreted as “There is no enemy under God.”  The book suggests having a the proper question be, “How can I find God in my enemy?”5 It seems Jesus’ teaching is too difficult to accept. However, “love of enemies” means not only to follow Jesus’ way, but also to prove the Christian’s faith that believes in God’s divine miracle of forgiveness.6 Secondly, violent revolution cannot bring radical change, because those changed by violence are no longer free from violence. The chain of violence keeps going. However, nonviolent revolution cuts the chain of violence and brings new order without violence. Third, Jesus’ way preserves respect for the rule of law.7 However, we need to discern God’s will before we become subject to the law. Also, Jesus’ way is beyond the law and results in freedom among us. Fourth, Christians needs to be totally free from the temptation to violence. Indeed, the third way of Jesus is the way of the Cross.8 We know that the way of the Cross is not the way of glory. It requires our faithful sacrifice. History testifies that the third way of Jesus works. We know the way of the Cross will work. However, the problem is our faith in the third way of Jesus.
    The book closes with signs of hope and with exhortations. Although nonviolence trembles under the feet of absolute violence, there is hope that more people will prefer nonviolence.  More people will succeed in faith and join Jesus’ third way. For me, the exhortations of this book look like one of the Paul’s letters in the New Testament. Although our reality is not easy to practice nonviolence, the book encourages us to practice nonviolence with faith.
    I do not have any objection to Wink’s argument to claim nonviolence. I want to share my story as the victim of violence. As I mentioned, my country, Korea, has gained independence by violence. There were terrorism, assassination, and war. Actually, I do not blame independence fighters. However, as I mentioned, their way brought another episode of violence. Since Korea was divided into two Koreas, the Korean War broke out. For three years (1950~1953), in this small peninsula, at least three million people were killed in this war. Also, the Korean War opened the Cold War. This is the consequence of bringing in another power to practice violence against Japan. The chain of violence keeps going. The lesson from the Korean War made South Korea establish an army. Since the Korean War, all Korean men must take the duty of national defense. As we know, the army trains people in violence. In my case, I spent three years to sharpening my violence skills. Also, I had to suffer the violence of higher rank soldiers. And, I practiced violence to lower rank soldiers. Therefore, not only I, but also all Korean men are the victims of violence. A few weeks ago North Korea launched a rocket. According to the news the rocket was developed for a nuclear missile. Yesterday I read a news article that North Korea has restarted nuclear fuel reprocessing, which is a sign it is going to make a nuclear missile. The violence of this small country is threatening the whole world. The consequence of violence is the endless chain of violence.
The consequence of violence is not only Korea’s responsibility, but also all nations’ responsibility. The Soviet Union and the U.S could have rejected the call for violence. Japan could have chosen to live together with Korea, not to invade the sovereignty of Korea. Indeed, the world had already chosen the solidarity of violence.  
Then, why does the world choose the solidarity of violence? The book does not show serious reflection on the tendency of human beings toward violence. According to Marjorie H. Suchocki, the tendency to violence that persists in human nature is the ground of sin.9 It is transferred to the others through relationship. The social structure systemizes the relationships of violence. Actually, it starts from the individual. Therefore, the chain of violence can be broken by individuals who together practice a new solidarity of nonviolence.  
However, as a Christian, I believe that the chain of violence will be broken. How can we cut the chain of violence? The answer is already given to us by Jesus. I believe that Jesus’ third way creates a new solidarity of nonviolence. Actually, the solidarity of nonviolence has continued since Jesus’ time. It is growing ever bigger. Even now, Jesus calls us to join his nonviolent way. However, we should know Jesus’ way is the way of the Cross. To join or not, it is up to us.