The premise: peace is a function of the character of the spirit of the community operating in the context of conflict, continually runs aground with many agencies and organizations working in the disciplines of peace building, operations and keeping. These agencies and organizations seek resolution in and through the material world of rule of law, principals of democracy, economic parity or redistribution of resources, boundary adjudication, health care services and personal / community security. Each is a critical parameter and variable of the equation for realizing peace. However, the missing variable of the equation is the invisible and abstract operating parameter called spirit. Without articulating this parameter attempts in peace operations will continue to be doomed to perpetual decay. So once again, this paper attempts to convince this Truth: without incorporating the realm of the Spirit in the equation of peace, the peace will continue to be elusive, because it is the spirit of the community that is made visible in and through its responses to real concrete tensions and conflict.
Peace building, peacekeeping, peace operations, peace logistics, etc., are critical peace disciplines. So too is peacemaking: disciplining the spirit of the people and nation. Why? Peace at its very core is concerned with the restoration of brokenness (non-peace) and the creation of something new — transformation (new relationships).
The peacemaking task can be likened to the growing of a great tree. We see the tree and all its wonderful branches and shade ourselves beneath its foliage and eat of its fruit, but what we do not see is most important: its structure of roots that feed the tree and anchor it to the ground. Without proper care given to the root – without good soil, water and feeding the structures are never fully realized and the tree never rises to its potential in the forest. It is the realization of this root structure of a society that is first and foremost the work of religious activity – that being the tasks of realizing the tenants of belief such that the tree grows and bears fruit. The question then is: What is the fruit of this tree and can it be consumed to create and sustain life ? Of course, what can be tasted in the fruit and seen in the tree helps to evaluate the symptoms of approaching decay resulting from the rise of conflict between the two worlds of visible tree and invisible root-ball.
Here is found the spiritual question we are afraid to ask. It is a question dismissed by most organizations seeking to realize peace. This is the question that honestly engages the hearts of human beings, and this is the proper role of religion.
There are as many definitions for religion as there are religions, but at its core, religions establish a set of practices defining its values and systems of belief (structures) whereby adherents realize in concrete ways those relational patterns valued and honored (that visible tree and its fruit). Thus, the goal of religion is to realize itself in the corporate body of the community. This working definition of religion is posited to help us find a common language to speak of peacemaking as a spiritual practice (work).
The concept we need to address as conversation partner is the role religion has played in creating myths to help us understand unexplainable life-experiences and the questions life throws at us. One key myth is the myth of redemptive violence.
A well-balanced discussion of the myth of redemptive violence can be found in Walter Wink’s book The Powers That Be, where redemptive violence is the corporate view of reality that says violence is the only way to ensuring people behave themselves to the end order is maintained – hence, society is controlled and preserved through the guaranteed use of violence on offenders. Nations practice this religiously in the prosecution of corporal punishment and wars where the offending parties are permanently removed from relationship with the other (person, society, or society of nations) and order is redeemed. Simply pay attention to the themes of movies, video games, cartoons and the like for verification that the spirit of this myth is alive and well in our societies. It is this spirit that must be redeemed before we can ever hope to realize sustainable peace. The mandate is not destroy the myth but to transform it, and even the most practiced of fighters knows that one never uses the opponents’ methods if there is going to be any hope for success. In other words, uses of redemptive violence to fight the same always end with the myth intact. Asymmetric-engagement of peacemaking capabilities is called for.
Why this myth remains so powerful is self-evident and only through the concentrated employment of new spiritual values can we hope to convert the spirit of this myth to be more restorative in nature and practice. Understanding the spirit of the myth provides possible points for intersection for transformation. Let us use the ancient Biblical story of the fall of creation that continues to shape the three largest religious groups in today’s world environment – the expulsion from the garden and the fruit of violence birthed by humanity’s first creation (Cain). Let us also consider how the theory of atonement processes evolved in attempts to shift from the spirit of redemptive violence to more peaceful and restorative living; even though the theory was never able to accomplished the task of transforming the spirit of violence.
The emphasis in these stories, however, is not the fallen state of humanity but the nature of the God of the Bible over and against the gods that birthed the myth of redemptive violence. The Biblical story in this setting is seditious because it gives testimony to a God who brings out of chaos (disorder) order and creates not out of violent action but in a thoughtful provocative way, and calls what is created “very good.” Thus the spirit of this story is not one of violence that redeems but one that thoughtfully brings order and creates goodness.
At this point it is very important to affirm the role of science (material and visible world) in all its forms as partner with spirit in connecting what has for so long been disjoined. Both are meant to be mutually supportive. The careful re-integration of these help us complete the equation of peace, but this requires examination of said stories in their context in juxtaposition.
John D Zizioulas makes an important observation here. He posits that the fissure between communion and otherness is at core the birthplace of conflict. He offers the explanation that fear is the wedge between one person and another (or between one community and another) and that this fear results in non-peace par excellence. His following insight is most instructive: we come into self awareness through coming to know our separateness … and we accept the other only in so far as he (she) does not threaten our privacy or … until our personal happiness has been fulfilled. Thus we see the matter before us is how we measure our identities … e.g.; I am this because I know I am not that. For Zizioulas and for many Christians, Jews, and Moslems this is the essence of the origin of sin – or “missing the mark” or failure living up to the fullest measure of our original (divinely) created nature.
Fear of losing our individual identity (or in the instances of communities – their identity) gives birth to non-peace where this non-peace is sustained through violence in all its forms (structural in form and function). Through structural violence we redeem our lost identity and the myth of redemptive violence saves the day as we huddle together in our separateness as individuals and groups one from another. This myth of redemptive violence is the forcing function driving the sustainable peace equation to instability as violence spirals out of control. What then is the proper control mechanism needed to sustain stability? What are the actions required to drive the equation back into the environment where peace is sustained?
Stability is sustained when the care and feeding of the souls of people and thus the soul of the community are cared for. This soul work is the spiritual feeding of the roots of our individuality and societies – the communion of our being together. This task is spiritual in nature realized in concrete ways in the fruit of the tree. And, what is this fruit?
It is the fruit of mercy in our relations, graciousness in humility, empathy, and desire to restore what has been broken to its original form of goodness. But before this fruit can be conceived the threat of non-peace must be transformed whereby individuals and whole identity groups are safe and secure in their being. This was the original intent of the given Biblical commandments. In them is established the vision set for all to reach for. Their purpose was to preserve the spirit of love between one and another – the True measure of peace and security.
The single most important point to be gleamed from the Biblical story of origin is this: The Spirit of Creation has its orientation towards the workings of the system – the spirit is systemic in its very nature. Taken in its fullest context, the whole of Biblical creation came into being as communion from its inception all the way to the fullness of its completion. Nothing survives without its connection to the other. Nothing created was in enmity with another. This is the vision that continues to be scandalous before the current established myth of redemptive violence. Not surprising is that the objective nature of science is proving this true and it has an important role the transformation of the myth.
Transforming the myth of redemptive violence will involve shining the spot light on the theology of atonement – the religious activity designed to keep the lid on the myth of redemptive violence. The commandments not to kill, covet, bear false witness, steal, or violate one’s oath (e.g. acts of adultery) did not land in some abstract context but came into being in the context of communities who practiced these things contrary to the commandments – most specifically the taking of human life either through the sacrifices made in war or religious atonement. Such acts both recognized the reality that the commandment not to kill was impossible to be realized thus violations (sin) had to be dealt with. Atoning for such sins became the ancient path to begin the task of transforming the myth of redemptive violence with the result of falling prey to the very same myth. The language “people must atone for their sins” continues to live in this context of the myth today. Thus exposed, this practice of atonement can be transformed. How can this process be accomplished?
The process begins by seeing how this myth lives within the structures of our societies and work to call these structures to accountability to serve the real purpose they were created for – sustainable peace. Second, show how these structures have morphed over time into self-serving entities whose survival today demands allegiance to the myth. Finally, develop the relationships within the social equations that leverage peaceful outcomes where minimizing fear between groups results in realizing life-producing actions as solutions to resolving conflicts.
