Table Of ContentS
How Christian people have framed the meaning of violence t
e
within their faith tradition has been a complex process f
subject to all manner of historical, cultural, political, ethnic f
e
and theological contingencies. As a tradition encompassing n
widely divergent beliefs and perspectives, Christianity
has, over two millennia, adapted to changing cultural and elements in Religion and Violence
historical circumstances. To grasp the complexity of this
tradition and its involvement with violence requires attention
to specific elements explored in this Element: the scriptural
and institutional sources for violence; the faith commitments
and practices that join communities and sanction both
resistance to and authorization for violence; and select C Christianity
h
historical developments that altered the power wielded by r
is
Christianity in society, culture and politics. Relevant issues in t
ia and Violence
social psychology and the moral action guides addressing n
violence affirmed in Christian communities provide a deeper ity
explanation for the motivations that have led to the diverse a
n
interpretations of violence avowed in the Christian tradition. d
V
About the Series Series editors io
Violence motivated by religious James R. Lewis len
beliefs has become all too Wuhan University c
e
common in the years since the Margo Kitts Lloyd Steffen
9/11 attacks. Not surprisingly, Hawai’i Pacific
interest in the topic of religion University
and violence has grown
substantially since then. This
Elements series on Religion
and Violence addresses this
new, frontier topic in a series
of c. fifty individual Elements.
Collectively, the volumes will
examine a range of topics,
including violence in major world
religious traditions, theories
of religion and violence, holy
war, witch hunting, and human
sacrifice, among others.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
Cover image: Jakub Grygier/Shutterstock the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271 ISSN 2397-9496 (online)
ISSN 2514-3786 (print)
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
ElementsinReligionandViolence
editedby
JamesR.Lewis
WuhanUniversity
MargoKitts
Hawai’iPacificUniversity
CHRISTIANITY AND VIOLENCE
Lloyd Steffen
Lehigh University
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
UniversityPrintingHouse,CambridgeCB28BS,UnitedKingdom
OneLibertyPlaza,20thFloor,NewYork,NY10006,USA
477WilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,VIC3207,Australia
314–321,3rdFloor,Plot3,SplendorForum,JasolaDistrictCentre,
NewDelhi–110025,India
79AnsonRoad,#06–04/06,Singapore079906
CambridgeUniversityPressispartoftheUniversityofCambridge.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’smissionbydisseminatingknowledgeinthepursuitof
education,learning,andresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence.
www.cambridge.org
Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781108796699
DOI:10.1017/9781108859271
©LloydSteffen2021
Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception
andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,
noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten
permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress.
Firstpublished2021
AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary.
ISBN978-1-108-79669-9Paperback
ISSN2397-9496(online)
ISSN2514-3786(print)
CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracyof
URLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication
anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwillremain,
accurateorappropriate.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
Christianity and Violence
ElementsinReligionandViolence
DOI:10.1017/9781108859271
Firstpublishedonline:April2021
LloydSteffen
LehighUniversity
Authorforcorrespondence:LloydSteffen,[email protected]
Abstract:HowChristianpeoplehaveframedthemeaningof
violencewithintheirfaithtraditionhasbeenacomplexprocess
subjecttoallmannerofhistorical,cultural,political,ethnicand
theologicalcontingencies.Asatraditionencompassingwidely
divergentbeliefsandperspectives,Christianityhas,overtwo
millennia,adaptedtochangingculturalandhistorical
circumstances.Tograspthecomplexityofthistraditionandits
involvementwithviolencerequiresattentiontospecific
elementsexploredinthisElement:thescripturaland
institutionalsourcesforviolence;thefaithcommitmentsand
practicesthatjoincommunitiesandsanctionbothresistanceto
andauthorizationforviolence;andselecthistorical
developmentsthatalteredthepowerwieldedbyChristianityin
society,cultureandpolitics.Relevantissuesinsocial
psychologyandthemoralactionguidesaddressingviolence
affirmedinChristiancommunitiesprovideadeeper
explanationforthemotivationsthathaveledtothediverse
interpretationsofviolenceavowedintheChristiantradition.
KEYWORDS:Christiansandviolence,anti-Jewishness,insecurity,
identityprotection,whitesupremacy
©LloydSteffen2021
ISBNs:9781108796699(PB),9781108859271(OC)
Downloaded from https://wwIwS.ScaNmsb:r2id3g9e7.o-r9g4/9c6or(eo. InPl ianded)r,es2s5: 1749-.134718.166(2p.8r1in, ot)n 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
Contents
1 Religion and Violence: Introduction, Clarifications
and Limitations 1
2 Theological Sources and Sanctions for Violence
and Nonviolence 8
3 Insecurity and Vulnerability 23
4 The Violence/Nonviolence Dialectic 42
5 Identity 66
6 Concluding Remarks 84
Bibliography 86
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
ChristianityandViolence 1
1 Religion and Violence: Introduction, Clarifications
and Limitations
ThiscontributiontotheCambridgeUniversityPressElementseriesclaims
toofferinsightintotherelationshipbetweenChristianityandviolence.On
thistopic,eventhemostcursoryreviewofthefaithtraditionwouldsupport
thepropositionthatviolencehasbeenapermanentandongoingissuesince
Christianitybeganovertwothousandyearsago.Inthathistory,Christians
have perpetrated violence through Crusades, heresy trials, anti-Jewish
pogromsandanti-Muslimattitudes,thesubordinationofwomen,andracist
colonialism;theyhavealsobeenvictimsofviolence.TheReligiousNews
Service has reported that “Christians remain one of the most persecuted
religious groups in the world ... [with Christians facing] imprisonment,
loss of home and assets, torture, rape and even death as a result of their
faith.”1 Christians have been proponents and opponents of violence – so
whatisnewtosay?Howdowegoaboutseekinginsightintotherelationof
Christianitytoviolencethatofferssomethingmorethantheunremarkable
observationthatthetwonotionsareofcourseinextricablyintertwined?
ThisElementisintendedtorespondtothisquestion.Theefforthereis
nottooffersomethingentirelynewandneverbeforeseenbuttoorganizean
approach to the question about Christianity’s relation to violence in such
awaythatthetopicisilluminated.Tothatend,wemustbeginbynoting
somequalificationsthatarenecessarytoestablishthescopeandparameters
ofthisstudy.Someofthesequalificationsarethemselvesobviousthingsto
noteaboutChristianityorviolenceortherelationbetweenthetwo,butthey
arenotedbecausetheywillprovideneededguidanceforwhatwillappearin
theupcomingpages.
Qualification1.Christianityisacomplexandmultiformreligion.Thereare
threeChristianities,notone–Catholicism,OrthodoxyandProtestantism–
1 ReligiousNewsServicePressRelease,“ViolenceagainstChristiansSurges
Globally,DataShowsMorethan9KAttacksonChurchesin2019,”Religious
NewsService,January15,2020,https://religionnews.com/2020/01/15/vio
lence-against-christians-surges-globally-data-shows-more-than-9k-attacks-on-
churches-in-2019/.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
2 ReligionandViolence
and a variety of forms of Christian faith are encompassed within each of
those divisions. (There have been some estimates that as many as 30,000
differentformsofProtestantismexist,whichismostlikelyahighexaggera-
tion,butitdoesmakethepoint.)So,toraiseaquestionabouttherelationof
violencetoChristianityrequiresthatonenotgeneralizeanyparticularclaim
toallstructuralformsandinstitutionsofChristianidentityandcertainlynot
to all Christians. A question, easily overlooked and often suppressed,
accompaniesthisinquiry:WhenonetalksaboutChristianityandviolence
to which Christianity – to which institutional form, to which division, to
whichauthoritiesorChristianidentities–isonereferring?Therewillbeno
one understanding of violence among Christians, no single and unified
responsetoviolenceonbehalfofthefaithbyfaithleadersorevencommu-
nities,andnosingleviewpointonhowandwhetherthefaithtraditionoffers
resources to justify violence. Inquiry into the topic of Christianity and
violenceisaparticularwayofinquiringintothebroadertopicof“religion
andviolence,”but“religion”and“violence”arebothdisputedterms.For
present purposes, acknowledging Christianity as a religion is not contro-
versial whatever qualifications one might make to the term “religion.”
Violenceisrelatedtotermslike“power”and“force,”butsincetherecan
belegitimatedusesofforcethatdonotamounttoviolence,thisvolumewill
considerviolencetobeanexcessiveuseofforcethatcausesdestructionand
harmandespeciallytheinjusticeofinjury.Contextoftendetermineshow
invoking the term “violence” to describe a destructive natural event like
a tornado differs from the violence of psychological abuse or physical
torture – these different meanings are all legitimate ordinary language
usesoftheterm,butinthisElementweshallkeepthetermviolenceasit
attachestoChristianityto meanthathumanagencyisinvolved inaction,
usuallyintentional,toinflictinjuryonothers.2
Qualification 2. A temptation exists to interpret the faith tradition of
Christianity as itself providing a source and sanction for acts of violence
2 JohnD.Carlson,“ReligionandViolence:ComingtoTermswithTerms,”in
AndrewR.Murphy,ed.,BlackwellCompaniontoReligionandViolence(West
Sussex,UK:WileyBlackwell,2011):14–18.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
ChristianityandViolence 3
(or,contrariwise,resistancetoactsofviolence),andcareisrequiredonthis
point. While there is no doubt that Christian beliefs and practices help
createbondsofunitytomotivateChristianpersonstoactsthateitherjustify
violenceornonviolenceunderChristianrubricsandactionguides,itisnot
thereligionofChristianitywritlargethatistheactoronthestageofhistory.
Christianity can be, and often is, invoked as if the religion itself were an
agent,asifthereligionitselfwerethecauseofviolenceortheactordeciding
between action options. But we must beware. Christianity is a cultural
institution, a symbol system organized around the ultimate values of
religion,butitcannotclaimagency.Itcanaffectanddoesaffectdecision-
making due to the values and action guides that it houses in its various
institutionalforms,butitisnotitselfanagent.3Theproblemthatarisesis
thatascribingactorstatustoanon-agentisto“misplaceconcreteness,”as
the informal fallacy by that name asserts. We must beware the fallacy of
reification, by which is meant that fallacy of ascribing to institutions and
nonactorentitiesthestatusofactors.Aninstitution,evenaculturalinstitu-
tion like a form of a religion, despite being created and perpetuated by
human beings, does not as an institution do what real human beings do.
Onlypeopleareagents.Onlypeopleareactorswhoaremotivatedtoact.
Onlypeoplearecapableofconceivingoptionsforactioninthecomplexity
ofcommunitylifewheredifferentideas,ideologiesandinstitutionalframe-
workscan play a role in providing justification for acting one way rather
thananother.ReinholdNiebuhrsupportedtheVietnamwar,MartinLuther
King opposed it – these two notable twentieth-century Christians found
grounding for their perspectives in the Christian tradition, but the
3 IntheAmericanlegalcontext,certaininstitutions–especiallycompaniesand
corporationsactingasnon-humanpersons–havebeenauthorizedtoenterinto
contracts,sueandbesued.Asfictionalizedpersonstheycanbeviewedasagents.
Suchnon-humanbutlegalpersons,however,donotgenerateintentionalityoutof
theirownresourceandarenotself-directingagents.Rather,theyhaveagency
conferreduponthembyhumanagentsactingthroughlegalmechanisms.Inthat
conferraloffictionalizedpersonhood,agencystillrestswiththosewhoconfer
agencyandclaimauthorizationtodoso.Agency,then,inthestrictsenseofagent-
as-person,continuestorestwithhumanratherthannon-humanpersons.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
4 ReligionandViolence
viewpointsadvancedandtheactionsadvocatedwerethoseofagentswho
believedtheirreligionhadaroletoplayindecidingpolicy,directionand
action. They invoked what they believed were the action guides that
Christianitysupported.Butthesewereindividualpersons–agents–who
acted and urged others to do so, not the religion. We must not ascribe
agency to Christianity asifit were itself an autonomousagent capable of
action and decision-making apart from the people who act based on the
valuesandbeliefsandpracticestheyfindintheirunderstandingofChristian
lifeandChristianvalues.Seekingtoconformactionstothatunderstanding,
peopleoffaithinvariouswaysandinaccordancewiththeircommitmentsof
faithwillfindreligionameansthathelpsframethevaluesandcommitments
thataffectwhattheywilldecidetodoto.Buthumanagentsdothis,notthe
culturalinstitutionofreligion.
Qualification3.ThisElementisentitledChristianityandViolenceratherthan
ChristianViolence.Scholars,mostnotablyWilliamCavanaugh,haveques-
tioned the whole idea of “religious violence,” his argument being that
seriousissuesarisewithhowthetermreligionitselfisdefined–andmost
religionscholarsdohesitatetodefinetheterm.Hisargumentisthatinthe
complicatedhistoryintheWest,theriseofsecularismallowedreligionto
becastasfanaticalandunreasoning–hencepronetoviolence–asthestate
andthepushtowardsecularismcreatedtheideaofrationalsecularviolence
over against irrational “religious violence.”4 Religious violence is for
Cavanaugh a myth designed to bolster the standing of secular authority
and justify a secular claim on powers over life and death, including the
powerofjustifiedstate-sponsoredviolence.Theclaimtoasecularfounda-
tionforthesepowersaroseattheexpenseofreligion,whichwasthen,from
theviewpointofrationalsecularity,relegatedtothearenaofirrationality,
fanaticismandabsolutism.Fromthissecularcreationofaformofviolence
contained within the confines of religion – religious violence – a form of
violence,auniqueform,emergedexpressingthatirrationalityconnectedto
religion–religiousviolence.Thisisoneview–thatreligiousviolenceis
4 WilliamCavanaugh,TheMythofReligiousViolence:SecularIdeologyandthe
RootsofModernConflict(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2009).
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 79.141.162.81, on 24 Apr 2021 at 14:01:54, subject to
the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859271
