Hunting down the ‘Radicalized ‘

I am feeling anxious.

The events leading up to Remembrance Day in Canada this year are particularly troubling. The killings of two military personnel in our nation’s capital city have created a deep level of mourning across the country. I join in this mourning.

Whenever a life is lost in violent encounter there is cause to mourn. It isn’t meant to be. It should not have happened.

I have been disturbed by the official rhetoric following these regrettable events. Numerous political leaders have defined the individuals responsible for the killings as persons who have been ‘radicalized’. In the global context and history of terrorism, this is a new term. The term will continue to be shaped and defined by official and popular usage. The introduction of the term is surrounded by negative sentiments. It is a way of targeting those who need to be stopped; whose activities need to be thwarted. The ‘radicalized’ need to hunted down and eradicated.

Today’s use of the term ‘radicalized’ does no favours to the values of the Radical Reformation movement of my spiritual heritage.  The 16th century Anabaptists were labeled radical reformers in large part because they refused to participate in war or to take the life of another. I pray that this kind of spiritual radicalization will continue.

I am not sure how to respond. I do not support the encouragement of people to sacrifice their lives in the killing of others. I am saddened that global systems seem to require people to take drastic actions.

It feels difficult to express my opposition to war without appearing disrespectful and uncaring for the two military personnel who have had their lives taken from them. The loss of their lives disturbs me deeply. It does require action. But it does not justify war.

On this Remembrance Day I want to join those mourning the loss of innocent lives. I want to support the notion that serious action is required. I want terrorism to stop. I want hatred to be disempowered.

So I will look to the One who is able to transform hearts, the One who can turn people from hatred and greed to the pursuit of health and wealth for all people. I will ask God to heal the world so that war and violence will cease – and the love of God and neighbour will rule the land.

Ed. note: For inspiring stories of peacebuilding in recent times as well as more distant history, visit www.liveforpeace.org.

A conflicting time of year

November is a conflicted time of year for me. And November 11 – Remembrance Day – sits right there near the middle of the month. It cries out for a response.

Do I wear a red poppy? Or should I wear a white poppy in support of the No More War movement born in the 1920s? Or perhaps I should wear MCC’s “To remember is to work for peace” button.

Should I attend veterans’ memorial services? Or should I participate in a counter-cultural peace expression as some Christians do? I don’t want to dishonour the veterans who say “Lest we forget” and “Never again.” Nor do I, as a Christian believer in non-violent peace building, want to honour war.

The tradition of Remembrance Day has evolved to mean many different things to many different people. That complicates matters. I’m not certain that any symbol I wear can adequately reconcile my conflicted feelings about Nov. 11.

What does seem right to me is to respond to Remembrance Day graciously and without confrontation.

I am reminded of Palmer Becker’s three main points in his booklet What is an Anabaptist Christian:  “Jesus is the centre of our faith. Community is the centre of our lives. Reconciliation is the centre of our work.”

Palmer’s third point is particularly relevant to me. I want my response to say that reconciliation is the centre of my work. But I’m not sure that a symbol – any symbol – can adequately convey that message.

But I can imagine what that message might look like. Not just on Remembrance Day, but throughout the whole year.

It should look like respecting and befriending those who chose to sacrifice their lives in war, even though I may disagree with their choice. It should mean supporting veterans in their efforts to seek healing when they return home – even if I disagree with the reasons for their injuries. It should mean we graciously welcome back to our Mennonite faith communities those of our own who have chosen military service – even though we may not believe that military intervention is a faithful solution. These are all responses offered in the spirit of reconciliation.

Discerning how to respond to Remembrance Day is not an easy task. But neither should it be. To question the reason for which good people have sacrificed their health and lives should never be an easy exercise. Only with humility and respect can helpful dialogue occur.

How will you respond to Remembrance Day?