i find this highly amusing from shaun groves in speaking to stan hauerwas’s staunch pacifism. tony, you might like this too.
Stanley Hauerwas
has said, “I’m a pacifist because I’m a violent son of a bitch.” And I
don’t believe him. Because he’s miniature. He’s a diminutive
(brilliant) theologian no more than five feet tall and speaking with a
voice that reminds me of an LP played at a 45’s speed. I’m not buying
that he’s violent. Not physically. And that lets some of the
credibility out of his entire pacifist position.
This quote is an illustration of why I love Hauerwas. Christians aren’t to be pacifist because we’re wimpy or afraid to fight. We’re pacifist because that’s the way Jesus taught us we ought to live.
I wonder about the ease with which Shaun assumes Hauerwas couldn’t hurt anyone. The man was proclaimed by Newsweek as the top theologian in America in the second half of the 20th century. If that says nothing else, it says he has influence. Influence is power, Shaun, and can be used for violence.
This quote is an illustration of why I love Hauerwas. Christians aren’t to be pacifist because we’re wimpy or afraid to fight. We’re pacifist because that’s the way Jesus taught us we ought to live.
I wonder about the ease with which Shaun assumes Hauerwas couldn’t hurt anyone. The man was proclaimed by Newsweek as the top theologian in America in the second half of the 20th century. If that says nothing else, it says he has influence. Influence is power, Shaun, and can be used for violence.
I like that quote; that we have the capacity for great violence should give us all the more reason to eschew it. We should all be a little bit frightened at our own capacity for sin.
I like that quote; that we have the capacity for great violence should give us all the more reason to eschew it. We should all be a little bit frightened at our own capacity for sin.
I recognize the tongue-in-cheek nature of Shaun’s post. That said, he’s talking about a fairly thin understanding of violence (i.e., physically hitting someone else). My sense from having taken Dr. Hauerwas in class is that he is referring to a much thicker version of that term, which includes one person physically striking another but is not limited to that. There are lots of ways to be violent (verbally, emotionally, systemically through participation in violent structures) that go beyond a fistfight.
I recognize the tongue-in-cheek nature of Shaun’s post. That said, he’s talking about a fairly thin understanding of violence (i.e., physically hitting someone else). My sense from having taken Dr. Hauerwas in class is that he is referring to a much thicker version of that term, which includes one person physically striking another but is not limited to that. There are lots of ways to be violent (verbally, emotionally, systemically through participation in violent structures) that go beyond a fistfight.