everywhereâ and their âvictory over every enemy and ... physical creation, we pray for peace and salvation upon people in âreal lifeâ situations of ... govern, protect the innocent, and endure the social and political realities of war and oppression.
inco m m unio n.o rg
http://www.inco mmunio n.o rg/2004/12/29/peace-in-o rtho do x-liturgy-and-life/
Peace in Orthodox Liturgy and Life by Philip LeMasters Originally published in Worship 77/5 (September 2003): pp 408-425. Portions of the essay were presented at the Orthodox Peace Fellowship’s North American conf erence in the summer of 2002. T he author is Prof essor of Religion and Chairman of the Department of Religion and Philosophy at McMurry University, Abilene, Texas. His f ourth book, "Toward a Eucharistic Vision of Church, Family, Marriage, and Sex", was published by Light & Lif e in 2004. Other essays and reviews have appeared in St. Vladimir’s Quarterly Review, T heology Today, Worship, Perspectives in Religious Studies, and T he Christian Century. He serves as deacon at St. Luke Antiochian Mission in Abilene, Texas. Anyone who has ever attended an Orthodox worship service has heard petitions f or peace. In the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, the f irst petitions of the Great Ektenia are f or “the peace f rom above, and f or the salvation of our souls” and “the peace of the whole world; f or the good estate of the churches of God, and f or the union of all men…” Congregants then pray in this opening litany f or their parish, the clergy and laity, the of f icials of the civil government, “f or our armed f orces everywhere” and their “victory over every enemy and adversary,”their city and all cities, “f or peacef ul times,” travelers, the sick, the suf f ering, “captives and their salvation,” and “our deliverance f rom all tribulation, wrath, danger, and necessity.” T he litany concludes with a plea f or God to “Help us; save us; have mercy on us,” and keep us by His grace. Finally, we remember the T heotokos and “commend ourselves and each other, and all our lif e unto Christ our God.” Orthodox Christians f ind this listing of petitions so f amiliar than many would be surprised to notice their direct relevance f or peace on earth. For these are not simply words sung at the beginning of each Liturgy; neither are they prayers which ref er merely to the inner tranquility of worshipers, nor to an entirely f uture Kingdom of Heaven. Instead, they embody an Orthodox vision of salvation and call upon the Lord to help us experience His heavenly peace right now in every dimension of lif e: personal, public, religious, temporal, and political. Whoever prays these prayers is asking already to participate in the Kingdom of God on earth, to f ind the healing and blessing of salvation in every dimension of one’s lif e — indeed, in every aspect of God’s creation.
T he entire Liturgy is an epiphany or manif estation of God’s Kingdom on earth. T he priest begins the service with a proclamation, “Blessed is the Kingdom of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: now and ever and unto ages of ages,” which declares that the assembly is now participating in the worship of Heaven. T he Church is raised to the lif e of the Kingdom as her members gather to glorif y and commune with the Holy Trinity. Jesus Christ of ten used the image of a wedding f east or banquet f or the Kingdom of God. T he Divine Liturgy makes present the Wedding Feast of the Lamb described in the Book of Revelation. Endnote It is the celebration and enactment of our sharing in Christ’s resurrected lif e and victory over death. As we prepare to receive the medicine of immortality, we pray that the Lord’s salvation will come upon all those created in the image and according to the likeness of God. Because we believe in the Incarnation and the goodness of God’s physical creation, we pray f or peace and salvation upon people in “real lif e” situations of peril and suf f ering, f or deliverance f rom the kinds of calamities and hardships that beset our mortal bodies in this lif e. Because we believe that human beings are persons created f or communion with God and others, we pray f or those who govern, protect the innocent, and endure the social and political realities of war and oppression. Endnote T he peace f or which we pray is holistic, including every dimension of our existence bef ore the Lord. God created us f or communion with Himself in all aspects of our personhood: body, soul, and spirit. Christian salvation entails the resurrection of the complete, embodied self in the blessed communion of Heaven and the transf ormation of the entire creation in subjection to the Holy Trinity. T he peace f or which we pray is our participation in that all-inclusive salvation. T here is no true peace other than that f ound in the healing and transf ormation brought to human beings by the God-Man in whom our humanity is united with the divine. Since God intends to save us all in every dimension of our existence, His healing concerns the f ull range of human lif e. Even as bread and wine become the means of our communion with the Lord, we are to of f er every bit of ourselves and of this world to the Father in union with the sacrif ice of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. We will then f ind lif e-giving communion with the Holy Trinity in everything we say and do; our lif e will become a eucharistic of f ering as we grow in holiness and union with God. If the Liturgy is a participation in the eschatological peace of the Kingdom of God, it is f air to ask whether the members of the Church recognize and live out this vision of heavenly peace. An immediate note of realism comes to mind, as the members of the Church are sinners who have not manif ested f ully the new lif e of Christ. Nonetheless, the presence of the Holy Spirit enables the Church to embody a f oretaste of the eschatological peace of the Kingdom of Heaven, and there is much in the history and ongoing lif e of the Church which witnesses to the saving peace of God here and now. T hough there is some apparent ambiguity in the Church’s teaching on Christian participation in war, the Orthodox vision of peace prizes self less love and f orgiveness over violence, viewing war in some situations as a lesser, necessary evil with damaging spiritual consequences f or all involved.
In contrast with Orthodoxy, it is easier to describe the traditional Western Christian justif ications of war, which include both the granting of plenary indulgences to those who f ought in the crusades and the af f irmation of just-war theory. T he f ormer envisioned the killing of inf idels as such a righteous act that the crusaders were released f rom all temporal punishments f or their sins, including exemption f rom purgatory. T he latter, which has been widely inf luential in western culture, provides moral sanction to wars which meet certain philosophical criteria. In contrast to these endorsements of war, Orthodoxy has never embraced the crusade ethic, and Canon XIII of St. Basil the Great prescribes exclusion f rom the chalice f or three years f or those who kill in war. Endnote Orthodoxy has viewed war always as an evil, “but a sometimes necessary evil f or the def ense of justice and f reedom. T he only normative ideal is that of peace, and hence the Orthodox Church has never made rules on the subject of ius belli and of ius in bello.” Endnote Moral rules do not remove the harm to one’s soul of killing another human being, even in war. To take lif e is to f all short of the norm of Christlike love, and exclusion f rom Communion f or a period may be necessary to allow time f or the spiritual healing which is necessary f or one to commune worthily with the Lord. Endnote It is debatable, however, whether the Church has traditionally enf orced this discipline. Endnote Father Alexander Webster agrees that a theory of justif ied war “has never been systematically elucidated in Orthodox moral theology,” and he describes participation in such a war as “a lesser moral option than absolute pacif ism, f or those unwilling or unable to pay the f ull price of prophecy.” He suggests that Orthodox criteria f or a just war include a “proper political ethos,” meaning that the nation going to war should f ollow “the natural-law ethic and have positive relations with the Orthodox community.” T he war should also take place f or the “def ense of the People of God” f rom injustice, invasion, or oppression “by those hostile to the f ree exercise of the Orthodox f aith.” A proper “spiritual intent” should also lead to “f orgiveness and rehabilitation” of enemies as persons who bear the image of God, and not “mere revenge, self -righteousness, or conquest.” Webster states that
Whereas the pacifist seeks to emulate Jesus as the Good Shepherd who allowed Himself to be slain unjustly by and for sinners, the just warrior perceives a higher duty: to defend the relatively innocent from unjust aggression. If the Orthodox pacifist can never do anything evil even for a reasonably just end, the Orthodox warrior cannot preserve his personal holiness by allowing evil to triumph through his own inaction.
T hough the Christlike response of “turning the other cheek” to assaults is the spiritual ideal, the Orthodox Church does not prescribe pacif ism or nonviolence as a legal requirement of the Christian lif e. T he Church’s moral guidance serves the goal of theosis, of guiding the members of Christ’s Body to growth in holiness and union with the Trinity. T he canons of the Church are applied pastorally in order help particular people f ind salvation as they seek to be f aithf ul in the given set of challenges and weaknesses which they f ace. T he Church’s experience is that temporal authority and the use of f orce are necessary to restrain evil and promote good in our f allen world. T hough the witness of the early Church was largely — but not exclusively–pacif ist, the Byzantine vision was of symphonia or harmony between God’s Kingdom and earthly realms. Hence, Christian emperors and armies f ought wars and sustained a social order that sought to embody f aithf ulness to the Lord in all areas of lif e. Church and empire were to be united “even as the divine and human natures of Christ are united in the One Person of the Incarnate Son of God.” Endnote T hat high-minded vision was never f ully realized in Byzantium; human sinf ulness corrupted its political and ecclesiastical leaders in many ways.
T here have remained in Orthodoxy, however, indications of the ideal of peace. Monks and clergy, f or example, may not serve in the armed f orces and are f orbidden to use violence even in cases of self -def ense. Endnote Canon V of St. Gregory of Nyssa “states that should a priest ‘f all into the def ilement of murder even involuntarily (i. e. in self -def ense), he will be deprived of the grace of the priesthood, which he will have prof aned by this sacrilegious crime.’” Endnote T hose who hands have shed blood may not be the icons of Christ which priests are called to be, and are not suited to serve at the altar. Endnote Even as the sacramental priesthood is a special vocation to which not all are called, the straightf orward embodiment of Christlike, nonviolent love — which is incumbent upon priests — is not canonically required of all believers. In keeping with the practice of economia, the norm of nonresistant love may not be directly applicable to those whose vocations in our broken world require the def ense of the innocent. T hese may grow in holiness by f ighting justly, even as they mourn the harm done to themselves and others by their use of violence. Greater harm, indeed, might bef all them and others if they ref used to def end the innocent f rom attack and abuse. In a f allen world populated by sinf ul people, every Christian’s journey to the Kingdom will be marked by a measure of spiritual brokenness, and repentance is the only road to healing. Endnote A sixth-century Byzantine text on military strategy begins with a note of realism about war:
I am well aware that war is a great evil, and even the greatest of evils. But because enemies shed our blood…, because everyone has to defend his homeland and his fellow citizens…, we have decided to write about strategy.
Particular countries and peoples — such as Byzantium, the Balkan states, and Russia — have historically been so closely identif ied with the Orthodox f aith that their def ensive wars against Islamic invaders, though not western-style crusades, may be described as “a dif f icult and painf ul def ense of the Cross.” T he appeal f or “victory over their enemies” at the f east of the Exaltation of the Cross, and other martial imagery in the liturgies, has at times been corrupted into a “national Messianism” in which the soldier becomes a martyr and the evil of war is f orgotten. It would be a mistake, however, to suggest that Orthodoxy has enthusiastically endorsed war. Even in cases of the def ense of a Christian people f rom Islamic invasion, the spiritual gravity of warf are has not been f orgotten. For example, St. Sergius of Radonezh in the f ourteenth century gave his blessing to Grand Prince Dimitri to f ight a def ensive war against the Tatar Khan only af ter he received assurances that the prince had already exhausted every possible means of reconciliation. Kutuzov’s strategy in response to Napoleon’s invasion was similar, abandoning Moscow to the French and merely harassing Napoleon’s f orcing during their withdrawal, “having no other aim than to drive him back to the f rontier.” Endnote Not examples of unbridled militarism, these are instances which ref lect the reluctant acceptance of war at times as a necessary evil.
T hese notes of realism should not be allowed to obscure the Church’s insistence that “non-retribution, the avoidance of violence, the returning of good f or evil…and the harmony of peoples” are a holistic “normative good which Christians must seek with God’s help.” Endnote Father Stanley Harakas observes that “the Eastern Patristic tradition rarely praised war, and to my knowledge, almost never called it ‘just’ or a moral good….T he peace ideal continued to remain normative and no theoretical ef f orts were made to make conduct of war into a positive norm.” Endnote It is not dif f icult to compile a list of Fathers who stressed the superiority of peace to war, including St. Basil the Great, St. John Chrysostom , St. Cyprian of Carthage, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Gregory of Nyssa. Endnote T he evidence f or widespread pacif ism in the Church is strongest bef ore St. Constantine, when the Empire was pagan, persecuted Christians, and of ten required soldiers to participate in the worship of f alse gods. Even af ter the Christianization of the Empire, with the eventual requirement that only Christians could be in the army, there remained teachers of pacif ism in the Church, such as Pope St. Damasus, Prudentius, and St. Paulinus of Nola. Webster remarks that St. Paulinus in the f if th century was “the last great Church Father who addressed in explicit detail the moral problem of war f rom an absolute pacif ist perspective.” Endnote From then on, pacif ist sensibilities would manif est themselves in other contexts, such as the requirement of clerical and monastic nonresistance. T he contrast between the canonical requirement of pacif ism f or the clergy and the acceptance of military service by the laity requires f urther comment. Webster notes that the identif ication of clergy with the nonviolent norm and the allowance of participation in war on the part of the laity implies a bif urcated ethic with a higher and a lower class of Christians, which could be taken to imply that the clergy are necessarily holier than the laity. More f aithf ul to Orthodox ecclesiology would be the af f irmation that the norm now embodied by the clergy will at some f uture point become normative f or all Orthodox. Here we are dealing with a point of eschatological tension that will be resolved in the Kingdom of Heaven, when all will be pacif ists, f or violence and other evils will be destroyed. In the present, the clergy are “expected to demonstrate the attainment of an advanced spiritual and moral state to which all Orthodox Christians are [ultimately] called.” T he recognition of pacif ism as an ultimate norm or goal f or all Christians should not be surprising. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ calls his f ollowers to theosis, to growth in holiness and perf ection bef ore God. “Be perf ect, theref ore, as your heavenly Father is perf ect.” (Matt. 5:48) T his teaching is the conclusion of a section f ocusing on the love of enemies, which is immediately preceded by the Lord’s repudiation of resistance against evil. “Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also.” (5:39) T hese passages indicate that the repudiation of violence in self -def ense is a sign of growth in holiness. Our Lord’s example of of f ering Himself nonresistantly on the cross f or our salvation is the paradigmatic epiphany of the self less love in which human beings are to participate as they come to share by grace in the lif e of the Trinity. T hough not absolute pacif ists, some saints chose to accept death in a Christlike manner, and thus manif ested their holiness. For example, the Passion of St. Edmond, who reposed in the ninth century, reports that this king of East Anglia of f ered himself f or death to the invading Danish king in order to save the lives of his subjects. St. Edmund is reported to have “declared that he would f ollow the example of Christ and ‘ref rain f rom staining my pure hands.’” St. John Vladimir, an eleventh century Serb, handed his sword to his Bulgarian f oe, declaring, ” Take it and kill me, f or I am ready to die, as were Isaac and Abel.” T hough St. John had been a f ierce warrior in the past, there is a “perf ect, non-violent, Christ-like quality” apparent in his death. Endnote T he f amous Saints Boris and Gleb of Kiev accepted death without resistance at the hands of their ambitious royal brother’s assassins in the eleventh century. As Webster notes, “St. Boris of f ered himself as a voluntary, Christ-like sacrif ice f or the sins of the assassins and consequently made no attempt to resist the lethal violence visited upon his person.” An experienced warrior, St. Boris made “a conscious choice… to ref lect the ideals of nonresistance and expiatory sacrif ice modeled originally by Christ.” T hese saints are paradigmatic examples of “the moral lif e in Christ. T heirs was preeminently a witness on behalf of the redemptive value of innocent suf f ering and the transf ormative power of nonresistance to evil.”
In considering the relevance of these saintly examples to the question of peace, we should remember that Orthodoxy does not separate morality f rom theosis, f rom the salvation of the whole person in the Kingdom of God. We will not f ind the healing of our corrupted selves and world in moral theory of any kind. Instead, the f ocus of Orthodox thought is on the person who is invited to participate by grace in the eternal lif e of the communion of Persons called the Trinity. We journey to that blessed communion as sinners who live amongst other sinners in the brokenness of our f allen world. Hence, the healing of our inf irmities will have to take account of the particular set of limitations, weaknesses, and corruptions that beset us and those around us. We need therapy f or spiritual strength, not a f ree-standing ethic of any kind. T hough the nonresistant love of Christ is the ultimate norm f or the Christian in response to evil, the Church recognizes that we live in a corrupted world in which the use of f orce is sometimes mournf ully necessary to restrain evil, protect the innocent, and f oster a humane social order. Some who inhabit such a world are called to the pacif istic vocation of the cleric or the monk. Others f ind themselves with a set of responsibilities as soldiers, police of f icers, or public of f icials which precludes their straightf orward embodiment of that ideal. T hey are not to be condemned, however, f or they too serve God’s purposes f or the protection and care of persons who inhabit a f allen world. Not a matter of abstract moral philosophy, the question of the vocation to which a particular person is called is a matter of noetic knowledge: of a spiritual, personal encounter with the Trinity. As we grow in our participation in the ascetical and sacramental dimensions of the Christian lif e, we will grow in unity with God and know more f ully the path to salvation which we are to take. T he discernment of vocation is not, however, an individual matter; it is a personal endeavor of growing in unity with the Trinity through the direction of a spiritual f ather or mother and a lif e lived in f ull communion with the Church. Personhood has nothing to do with the isolated individual of modern western culture, but requires a shared lif e in which we achieve the likeness of God, who is not an isolated monad but a community of Persons. As we have seen in the lives of the saints, a successf ul soldier may hear the call to lay down his lif e nonresistantly as an epiphany of Christ’s self less love in the world. Some, whether f ormer soldiers or not, may advance in holiness to the point where anything less than complete pacif ism is unthinkable and would amount to turning away f rom Christ. T here is no ground f or condemning the soldier, however, who af ter proper discernment of f ers his lif e to God and neighbor by mournf ully using f orce to protect the innocent. T he Church does not reject the particular f orm of dying to self to which he is called, as it may be necessary f or his growth in holiness in the particular mix of broken circumstances which he f aces. T he Canons do stipulate, however, that one who kills in war f ind spiritual healing through repentance bef ore approaching the chalice. T he rationale f or this standard is not so much moral in the sense that a code has been broken. To take the lif e of a human being — created in the image and according to the likeness of God — is a grave matter which, regardless of the circumstances, threatens to do prof ound damage to one’s soul. T he Church’s wisdom is that the appropriate therapies must be applied bef ore the soldier communes with Christ in the Eucharist, f or the risk of receiving the Holy Mysteries unprepared is great. As we pray bef ore receiving the Body and Blood of Christ, “Not unto judgment nor unto condemnation be my partaking of T hy Holy Mysteries, O Lord, but unto the healing of soul and body.” Since we are created and redeemed f or communion with the Holy Trinity, we are intended f or the peace and harmony of the Kingdom of Heaven. We are to grow in holiness by of f ering the entirety of ourselves and world to the Father in union with the sacrif ice of Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. T he one who takes lif e, who kills another created in the image and according to the likeness of God, participates in a paradigmatic sign of the estrangement of humankind f rom this eschatological harmony. Granted, to kill in war may well be an involuntary sin which is regrettably necessary as a lesser evil in a case of national self -def ense. Nonetheless, to do so is to f all short of the mark of the f ulf illment of God’s intentions f or our personhood. T he same could be said of those who support or benef it f rom wars. T hey too are involved in the corruption of the human condition, and need the spiritual therapy of the Church f or their involuntary sin as they continue the journey of theosis.
T he wisdom of the Orthodox view of war as a lesser evil is apparent f rom a sober reading of the application of just-war theory. Only the very naive would ignore how national self -interest and lust f or power corrupt every instance of warf are. Political and military leaders typically control the inf ormation necessary to evaluate their own actions in war, and subsequently are their own judges in the matters in which they have the greatest self interest. It is hard to imagine any nation, regardless of the f orm of government, pref erring to lose a war when certain violations of just-war standards would increase the likelihood of victory or save the lives of their own soldiers. For example, the Allies during World War II destroyed any number of civilian population centers in Germany and Japan, and killed untold numbers of noncombatants, in the name of winning the war and saving the lives of Allied servicemen. Certainly, the Allied victory was as just as any military victory in human history; f ar greater harm would have come to millions of persons who bear the image of God f rom an Axis victory. It remains the case, however, that the Allied victory was a lesser and necessary evil in which all involved had at least some blood on their hands. T he Church shows great wisdom in viewing war as an occasion f or repentance and spiritual healing regardless of its place on a measuring stick of moral justif ication. Orthodoxy is ultimately concerned about the salvation of persons, not moralism. T he petitions f or peace in the Ektenia of the Prothesis and the Ektenia Bef ore the Lord’s Prayer shed light on these issues. In both petitions, we pray that “the whole day may be perf ect, holy, peacef ul, and sinless,” and that “we may complete the remaining time of our lif e in peace and repentance.” T hese are descriptions of the kind of lif e that is most conducive to spiritual growth. A day of military combat is hardly perf ect, holy, peacef ul, and sinless. Likewise, to complete the course of one’s lif e in peace and repentance would seem very dif f icult f or one who is engaged in or preparing f or war. Killing in war, no matter how morally justif ied and necessary it may be under the circumstances, f alls short of the ideal embodied in these litanies. When the gif ts are brought through the royal doors in preparation f or the Eucharist, we journey with Christ to Jerusalem. Having put aside all earthly cares, we prepare to commune with the One who raises our human nature to the eternal peace of God’s Kingdom. T he priest prays that we will be made worthy to partake of the Eucharist “with a pure conscience: unto remission of sins, unto f orgiveness of transgressions, unto communion with the Holy Spirit, unto inheritance of the Kingdom of Heaven, unto boldness towards T hee, and not unto judgment nor unto condemnation.” T hose whose vocations include the taking of human lif e will likely need special spiritual counsel in order to lay aside their earthly cares and approach the chalice with conf idence in God’s mercy. It is not uncommon to meet veterans who are tormented f or the rest of their lives by the horrors of war. I recall the f ather of a childhood f riend who suf f ered f rom nightmares thirty years af ter the conclusion of his military service during World War II. T hose who are trained to kill sometimes have dif f iculty returning to the mores of civilian lif e, not to mention the lif e of theosis. When we join ourselves to Christ’s eucharistic sacrif ice, we participate in a victory that is not of this world and which came through the nonresistant, self less love of the Lord. T he victory of the Kingdom is not that of an earthly soldier, but of the Lamb who was slain. Killing in war may be a necessary evil in the world as we know it, but it f alls short of the way shown by Christ. T he Eucharist is the Wedding Feast of the Lamb, a celebration of the eternal lif e of eschatological peace, not of worldly strif e; and we must be prepared to receive it unto our healing and salvation, not to judgment and condemnation. A crucial dimension of preparation f or communion is reconciliation with those whom we have of f ended or who have of f ended us. T he Lord f ulf ills the Old Testament commandment against murder by extending it to the passion of anger. Hence, to have anger in one’s heart toward another is a violation of the commandment against murder. It should not be surprising that a murderer would need spiritual healing bef ore being prepared to commune unto salvation. Jesus Christ told His disciples, “When you are of f ering your gif t at the altar, if you remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gif t there and bef ore the altar and go; f irst be reconciled to your brother, and then come and of f er your gif t.” (Matt. 5:23-24) To attempt to commune with the Lord when we are not in communion with our neighbors is a travesty, an attempt to smuggle corrupting passions into the Kingdom of Heaven.
It also a ref usal to f orgive others even as we seek the Lord’s f orgiveness of our sins. We receive the Eucharist “unto the remission of sins and unto lif e everlasting.” We pray that God will “f orgive us our trespasses even as we f orgive those who trespass against us.” Jesus Christ’s parable on f orgiveness concludes that severe judgment will come upon those who expect God’s f orgiveness while not f orgiving others. (Matt. 18:35) T hose who undertake military combat will likely f ace great challenges to f orgive those who tried to kill them and their comrades in war. T he horrors of the shedding of blood, and other atrocities of ten associated with war, may make f orgiveness dif f icult f or whole nations who suf f ered at the hands of their enemies. Such experiences create obstacles f or communion and growth in holiness, and are an indication that war f alls short of the spiritual norm of the Kingdom. Webster observes that the Church’s mystical, ascetic spirituality includes points of emphasis which hardly seem compatible with war. More important here is a lif e of spiritual warf are against temptations. Participation in violence would likely provoke anger and pride, and hinder the development of Christlike patience, f orgiveness, and humility. Endnote Nonviolence, nonresistance, voluntary kenotic suf f ering, and universal f orgiveness are characteristics of the Orthodox spiritual lif e that are in marked contrast to the mentality of military strategy and tactics. Endnote An Orthodox pacif ist may claim that the complete rejection of violence f lows naturally f rom f oci on theosis, asceticism, unlimited love f or others, and the eschatological peace made present in the Holy Mysteries. Endnote Webster cautions that “the disvalues” of such pacif ism are also apparent, f or “T he cost of discipleship — the cross — is of ten borne more painf ully by the ‘innocent’ victims of the aggressor than by their righteous pacif ist brethren.” T he pacif ist who ref uses to oppose evil with violence “must grapple with the involuntary human suf f ering by others that results f rom his voluntary kenotic moral decision.” Pacif ists, he notes, look to the victory of the Lamb in the eschatological f uture as the answer to the present injustice of the world. Endnote Webster is correct to conclude that absolute pacif ists will have to come to terms with the results of their ref usal to use f orce as a means to combat evil. If war is at times a necessary evil f or the protection of the innocent, those who ref use to participate may well be asked why they do not do that which is morally necessary. A key consideration, however, is that of vocation; namely, how is one called to respond to evil in a way that will help one participate more f ully in the holiness of God? Clergy, monks, and some laity have the vocation to make of their lives epiphanies of the self less love of Christ, regardless of whether their actions are of immediate help in the resolution of a given political or military crisis. T hat vocation is a matter of noetic knowledge, of spiritual discernment which we f ind as we grow in holiness in the context of the lif e of the Church. T hose who know that their path to salvation has no place f or the violence of warf are will be pacif ists, not because of moral theory, but because that is what God wants of them. T hat is how they are called to of f er their lives to the Lord, to grow in union with the Holy Trinity. At the same time, those who discern that their path to holiness requires them mournf ully to take up arms in a given circumstance will do so in the context of the brokenness of the world. T hey will risk the spiritual damage done by warf are f or the sake of serving God’s purposes f or the protection of the innocent and the vindication of justice. T heir military service will also be a matter of of f ering themselves to God, of progressing on the journey of theosis in the way in which the Lord has called them. T hey will need special spiritual guidance in order to f ind the healing of the Kingdom, but the way of salvation is certainly not closed to them. T he petitions of the Liturgy on behalf of the civil authorities and armed f orces indicate that they have a legitimate place in the Christian lif e. We pray f or persons involved in these endeavors, even as we pray f or all who need God’s healing and peace. As St. Cyril of Alexandria notes, we pray and of f er “the spiritual sacrif ice” of the Eucharist “f or the common peace of the Churches, f or the welf are of the world; f or kings; f or soldiers and allies; f or the sick; f or the af f licted; and, in a word, f or all who stand in need of succor…” T he Church of f ers God’s great mercy to all those who share in the corruption of our f allen world.
It is notable that many of the Church’s saints are soldier-martyrs who accepted death rather than commit idolatry to the pagan gods of Rome. Endnote T he soldierly virtue of courage is certainly evident in the witness of martyrs who endured terrible suf f ering f or the sake of a f aith which they ref used to deny. A Russian author has claimed that “military language expresses better… than any other the ways of the Christian lif e… For the f irst Christians, the army was not something to abhor but rather one of the centers where the virtues of Christianity were prepared.” Endnote T here are also saints who renounced the military vocation because of its incompatibility with the way of Christ, such as St. Martin of Tours. Webster notes that the saints’ martyrdom, not the particular details of their relationship to the military, was of decisive importance. T he accounts of their martyrdom likely ref lect dif f erent perspectives on the propriety of military service by Christians. Endnote Nonetheless, all Orthodox-pacif ists and soldiers alike–venerate these saints as those who achieved great holiness by dying to self out of love f or God. T he Orthodox Church prays f or peace f or the whole world and f or the armed f orces of our nations. We have saints who were pacif ists and saints who were great military leaders. We do not have the precise moral categories about war which are characteristic of western Christianity. T he f ocus of the Orthodox is on the salvation of persons by their growth in holiness and union with the Holy Trinity. All those persons are sinners who live in a world f ull of sinners; hence, it should not be surprising that wars and other conf licts arise which require violence f or their earthly resolution, and even f or the protection of the innocent and the vindication of justice. Some are called to f ight in those wars, even as they mourn the involuntary sin of taking the lives of enemy soldiers as a lesser, necessary evil. T hey f all short of the nonresistant way of Christ, and the Church will provide the spiritual therapies necessary f or their healing. Others-whether clergy, monastics, or laity-grow in holiness to the point that their lives become epiphanies of the self less love of Christ in turning the other cheek. T heir prophetic witness is a f oretaste of the Kingdom of Heaven, and reminds those who take up arms of the corruption of a world which has not yet f ound the peace of God. T he tension which we f ind in Orthodoxy between the norm of peace and the allowance of war is precisely an eschatological tension. When the Kingdom comes in its f ullness, there will be no wars. Until then, we must grow in holiness, each of us being at a dif f erent point on the journey to the theosis. For some, that journey will involve the mournf ul taking of lif e; f or others, it will not. Still, we will pray “f or the peace f rom above and the salvation of our souls.”
