How Real Christians Fight Back

I don't know how many of you have read Paul Loeb's book "The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear" but there's an excellent excerpt in there from Walter Wink's book "Jesus and Nonviolence: The Third Way." The name of the excerpt is called "Jesus & Alinsky" and details some often misunderstood Bible passages in a new light. [more below]

By using Jesus's examples and comparing them to Saul Alinsky's rules for nonviolent protest we are given an excellent guide for protesting the wrongs being committed today in our names as both Americans and Christians. Let me urge you to read this as it provides some great lessons to apply in everyday life when confronting those who would twist goodness into serving other purposes.
I am so glad to have found it online that I had to share it. Click the link above for the full version.  Here's a teaser excerpt:

You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if anyone would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. (attributed to Jesus in Matthew 5:38-41, Revised Standard Version)

Many who have committed their lives to working for change and justice in the world simply dismiss Jesus' teachings about nonviolence as impractical idealism. And with good reason. "Turn the other cheek" suggests the passive, Christian doormat quality that has made so many Christians cowardly and complicit in the face of injustice. "Resist not evil" seems to break the back of all opposition to evil and counsel submission. "Going the second mile" has become a platitude meaning nothing more than "extend yourself." Rather than fostering structural change, such attitudes encourage collaboration with the oppressor.

Jesus never behaved in such ways. Whatever the source of the misunderstanding, it is neither Jesus nor his teaching, which, when given a fair hearing in its original social context, is arguably one of the most revolutionary political statements ever uttered.

When the court translators working in the hire of King James chose to translate antistenai as "Resist not evil," they were doing something more than rendering Greek into English. They were translating nonviolent resistance into docility. The Greek word means more than simply to "stand against" or "resist." It means to resist violently, to revolt or rebel, to engage in an insurrection. Jesus did not tell his oppressed hearers not to resist evil. His entire ministry is at odds with such a preposterous idea. He is, rather, warning against responding to evil in kind by letting the oppressor set the terms of our opposition.

Framing from Jesus anyone?

•  Tip Jar

  Let me know what you think. If this diary doesn't scroll off before anyone reads it.

  by nofundy on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:04:58 PM PDT

•  Another possible interpretation

  The "second mile" part stems from a Roman law that a soldier could draft someone on the spot to carry a burden for him, for one mile (actually, a close equivalent, probably 8-10 stadia). This was the law used when Simon of Cyrene had to carry Jesus's cross when Jesus himself was unable to take it further.

  The thing is, laws like that (which are meant to establish the pecking order in society) can be turned against those using the laws. For example, a soldier telling a Christian to carry his gear for a mile could have ended up having listened to the carrier witness to him -- not just for one mile, but for two.

  When Paul was in prison, chained between two guards, his attitude was quite likely, "I'm not chained to you, you're chained to me! Now listen to this...."

  In this context, turning the other cheek works the same way -- where the aggressor intended you to respond on his terms, you turn it around, taking control of the situation. You often end up with two red cheeks, but by not fighting back (in kind) you increase the possibility for something better to happen.

  "Do not resist an evildoer" is thus a sort of spritual judo. You defeat a stronger enemy by turning his own strength against him. It can also provide an opening for witness.

  by dirtroad on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:38:06 PM PDT

  •  Sports analogy:

    In football, when one player punches another player, and the second player punches back, often it is the player who punched back who gets penalized.

    If that player can keep his head about him, and not retaliate, he wins: 15 yards for his team, and maybe the opponent is ejected.

    I've noticed something:  In the papers, whenever groups from the right get into a fight with a group from the left, you can usually tell who threw the first punch.  If the person from the left threw the first punch, the papers will blame the altercation on the group on the left.

    However... if the people on the right threw the first punch, and the people on the left hit back, then they call it "fisticuffs" - offsetting penalties, to use a sports analogy.

    If you don't hit back, our opponents look like the jerks that they are.  You use your opponents attacks against them.  I don't claim that turning the other cheek is easy, by any means.

    by A Citizen on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:53:19 PM PDT

•  Evangelicals Not Always the "Enemy"

  While somwhat off-topic, I figured that I'd mention an article in today's New York Times on the efforts of evangelicals to make global warming (and environmentalism somewhat more generally) a major issue.  Selected quotes by evangelical leaders in the article include:

  "I don't think God is going to ask us how he created the earth, but he will ask us what we did with what he created."

  "The question is, Will evangelicals make a difference, and the answer is, The Senate thinks so.  We do represent 30 million people, and we can mobilize them if we have to."

  "Christ said, 'What you do to the least of these you do to me.'  And so caring for the poor by reducing the threat of global warming is caring for Jesus Christ."

  "Why, if we're social tinkering to protect the sanctity of human life, ought we not be for a little tinkering to protect the environment?"

  To me, this shows once again that there is indeed fertile ground for progressives to work with those whose lives are defined by their faith.  We may not agree with them on many issues, but that is no reason for us to turn our backs on coordinating with them when the right issue does come along.

  by The Maven on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 01:09:34 PM PDT