Mennonites and War

[Soloist]

In the Ukraine thread, I often got the sense there was more energy spent urging Ukraine to surrender than saying Russia should never have invaded.

That’s starting from the wrong moral footing.

Neither Russia nor Ukraine is asking our opinion, of course — but too often, it feels like some people look for ways to blame the policeman instead of the criminal.

No its not starting from the wrong moral footing. Its detaching government right to rule from morality.

So ... government should rule from immorality and injustice?

When a country is taken over what is the outcome for the citizen with a long drawn out conquest versus a surrender without fighting? Can you honestly tell me the civilians in Ukraine would have it worse off it they met Russia's demands?

[sojourner]

No its not starting from the wrong moral footing. Its detaching government right to rule from morality.

So ... government should rule from immorality and injustice?

When a country is taken over what is the outcome for the citizen with a long drawn out conquest versus a surrender without fighting? Can you honestly tell me the civilians in Ukraine would have it worse off it they met Russia's demands?

Well it’s hard to know. Russia hasn’t been very transparent with their demands. I think after several years Putin finally came out and said Ukraine would need to surrender the whole Donbas region Russia lays claim to. Also Ukraine could never join NATO among a few other things. However, Putin never said that meeting those demands would end the war.
Being the ruthless dictator he is and the hatred he seems to harbor for the Ukrainians, it’s hard to know if life would be better for the Ukrainians if they would surrender the entire country…

[Soloist]

So ... government should rule from immorality and injustice?

When a country is taken over what is the outcome for the citizen with a long drawn out conquest versus a surrender without fighting? Can you honestly tell me the civilians in Ukraine would have it worse off it they met Russia's demands?

Well it’s hard to know. Russia hasn’t been very transparent with their demands. I think after several years Putin finally came out and said Ukraine would need to surrender the whole Donbas region Russia lays claim to. Also Ukraine could never join NATO among a few other things. However, Putin never said that meeting those demands would end the war.
Being the ruthless dictator he is and the hatred he seems to harbor for the Ukrainians, it’s hard to know if life would be better for the Ukrainians if they would surrender the entire country…

hatred? pre war documented hatred? according to what I've read the Russians mistakenly believed they would be called hero's.

[barnhart]

So when I call for the church to name the wrong of aggression and to care for victims, that’s not the same as giving the defender a free pass. It’s simply refusing to flatten the moral landscape into “both sides are equally to blame,” which is not what I see in Scripture or in reality.

I don't like the equal blame approach either. So would you call for my great, great grandfather to organize an official church response naming the aggressor?

[GaryK]

Was it wrong for a large army to invade and march into his region burning houses, barns and mills, shooting livestock and leaving them in the field, stealing horses and food like cured meat and butter? Did that result in innocent people starving? I think the church can clearly say that, and try to help the victims.

Should the church actively urge victims to surrender and say nothing about perpetrators? If not, should it draw distinctions?

I think these are insightful questions, are you willing to apply them consistently with the Russian invasion and the war in the days of my ancestor?

I think your question is built on a misunderstanding of what I am saying. I’m not claiming that “one side is good and the other is bad,” only that there is a moral difference between the side initiating unjust aggression and the side defending against it.

That difference doesn’t mean the defender is pure or above criticism — defenders can and do commit atrocities, and they bear responsibility for those. But that reality doesn’t erase the fact that the aggressor bears the greater moral burden for starting the conflict in the first place. As the war continues, they each have their own balance sheet.

So when I call for the church to name the wrong of aggression and to care for victims, that’s not the same as giving the defender a free pass. It’s simply refusing to flatten the moral landscape into “both sides are equally to blame,” which is not what I see in Scripture or in reality.

Where in the NT do you find teaching urging Christians to consider or evaluate the moral differences involved in nation-state wars? It appears the morality part you are arguing for is really important to you and I'm wondering what is behind that.

[ohio jones]

Should my great, great grandfather organization his church to formulate statements about the which side was the aggressor?

Was it wrong for a large army to invade and march into his region burning houses, barns and mills...

According to Romans 12/13, what should have been done with those burning coals?

Are we called to determine who is right and who is wrong? Perhaps we can determine who the enemy is; how does that affect our actions?

[Bootstrap]

So when I call for the church to name the wrong of aggression and to care for victims, that’s not the same as giving the defender a free pass. It’s simply refusing to flatten the moral landscape into “both sides are equally to blame,” which is not what I see in Scripture or in reality.

I don't like the equal blame approach either. So would you call for my great, great grandfather to organize an official church response naming the aggressor?

No, and I assume you are talking about the Civil War, where it's far less clear who the aggressor was.

But when your great, great grandfather posted on Internet forums, I think it would be right for him to point out atrocities committed by either side.

[Bootstrap]

Should my great, great grandfather organization his church to formulate statements about the which side was the aggressor?

Was it wrong for a large army to invade and march into his region burning houses, barns and mills...

According to Romans 12/13, what should have been done with those burning coals?

Are we called to determine who is right and who is wrong? Perhaps we can determine who the enemy is; how does that affect our actions?

Between a rapist and a victim, can we determine who is right and who is wrong? If the US dropped a nuclear bomb on Canada, would we be able to say that is wrong? What are the limits on our ability to know that some things are just plain wrong and say it plainly?

[sojourner]

When a country is taken over what is the outcome for the citizen with a long drawn out conquest versus a surrender without fighting? Can you honestly tell me the civilians in Ukraine would have it worse off it they met Russia's demands?

Well it’s hard to know. Russia hasn’t been very transparent with their demands. I think after several years Putin finally came out and said Ukraine would need to surrender the whole Donbas region Russia lays claim to. Also Ukraine could never join NATO among a few other things. However, Putin never said that meeting those demands would end the war.
Being the ruthless dictator he is and the hatred he seems to harbor for the Ukrainians, it’s hard to know if life would be better for the Ukrainians if they would surrender the entire country…

hatred? pre war documented hatred? according to what I've read the Russians mistakenly believed they would be called hero's.

The soldiers may very well have thought to be hero’s. Putin is the one that seems to harbor hatred. Why else would hi rise civilian apartment buildings, schools, and other non military infrastructure be targeted? Certainly isn’t out of love for his next door neighbors.

[Bootstrap]

No its not starting from the wrong moral footing. Its detaching government right to rule from morality.

So ... government should rule from immorality and injustice?

When a country is taken over what is the outcome for the citizen with a long drawn out conquest versus a surrender without fighting? Can you honestly tell me the civilians in Ukraine would have it worse off it they met Russia's demands?

I’m not a fortune teller — I can’t say with certainty what would have happened in an alternative history.

What I can say is this: there would be no war if Russia had not invaded, and there would be no war if Russia simply withdrew. That’s the straightforward path to peace.

I’m honestly surprised that the emphasis so often falls on Ukraine surrendering instead. Even if that did end this war (which I doubt), Putin has said he wants to restore the former glory of Russia — and that’s more than just Ukraine. Surrender there might simply shift the war to the next target.

But again, I’m no fortune teller.