Renewing the Challenge of Peace through the Promise of Active Nonviolence

A Long Tradition of Nonviolent Resistance

The theological reflection in a renewed Challenge or a papal encyclical on active nonviolence ought to emphasize it as a deeply rooted Christian value, with a tradition of practice and reflection on par with just war thinking. A pastoral discussion of active nonviolence should emphasize writing and activities of Christian activists and prophets of nonviolence, both historically and contemporarily. How we tell stories of Christian resistance to injustice matters, and a pastoral letter or encyclical on nonviolence can call on a truly rich and longstanding Christian tradition of ‘holy disobedience’. ²⁰ Stories of the early Christian martyrs can be framed not only as ‘the blood’ that served as the ‘seeds of the Church’, in Tertullian's famous formulation. Early Christian martyrs were not put to death simply ‘because they were Christians’ but because their Christianity called them to disobey the governing Roman Empire. For example, early martyrs Sts. Perpetua and Felicitas were ushered into the arena and executed because they disobeyed laws requiring them to worship Rome's civic gods. Their Christian discipleship led them to disobey their government, and death was the consequence of their holy disobedience. ²¹ A new document on nonviolence can tell the familiar stories of martyrdom as stories of resistance to oppression. In this way, we reclaim the full power of the martyrdom narratives, seeing in them the virtue of courage and a pathway of hope in the face of tyranny and injustice.

In the US context, a pastoral letter should also point to the American Catholic prophets of active nonviolence in the twentieth century including Thomas Merton's contemplative peace witness, Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin's Catholic Worker movement, Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huertas and the United Farm Workers movement, and Daniel Berrigan and the Plowshares movement. Each of these prophets should be lifted up by the Catholic hierarchy as faithful Catholic exemplars for active nonviolence.

The story of the early Church, and indeed of Christian faith-based nonviolent activism throughout history, forms an inspiring narrative of resistance to injustice and witness to nonviolence. To tell the story of Christianity as one of active nonviolent struggle for peace and justice, or in other words, the Kingdom of God, centers nonviolent practices in our faith, and clarifies that principles of Catholic social teaching—like solidarity, participation, and the preferential option for the poor and vulnerable—grow from an overall narrative of Christian faith and witness.

Christian groups and individuals continue to join themselves to the narrative of Christian active nonviolence today, and these too can be lifted up as examples in a pastoral letter to meet the moment. Today, in the US, Rev. William Barber II leads a movement called the Poor People's Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival. ²² The Poor People's Campaign uses the traditional tools of political activism, community organizing, and NVDA to demand a moral federal budget that prioritizes the needs of the most vulnerable, and to secure voting rights for all, among other goals. Barber's work represents the long slough of active nonviolence with a carefully crafted program of action meant to draw in hundreds, even thousands, of people to the faith-based work of active nonviolence, promoting peace, and doing justice. Its vision is long-term, with goals that can only be met over time through the dedication of many people working together.

At the same time, active nonviolence courageously carried out by just one person, or a small group, can have tremendous impact if it is creative and bold enough to meet the moment of injustice. One example can be found in the powerful, creative nonviolence of American activist Bree Newsome. In 2015, a white supremacist posted online photos of himself draped in the flag of the secessionist Confederate States of America (those states which fought against the Union forces in an attempt to maintain the institution of slavery during the US Civil War). Shortly thereafter, in what he described as an attempt to start a ‘race war’, he murdered nine Black Americans as they prayed together in Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina. In the days following, the country grappled with the meaning of the Confederate flag—viewed by many as a racist hate symbol—that still flew over the South Carolina state house. On 27 June 2015, Newsome donned a harness and, while her associates filmed and assisted her, she climbed the flagpole. As though speaking to the injustice of white supremacy itself she declared, ‘You come against me in the name of hatred, repression, and violence. I come against you in the name of God. This flag comes down today.’ As police officers surrounded her on the ground, she unhooked the flag from its moorings and began to descend the pole. Newsome declared herself ‘prepared to be arrested’. She was handcuffed and led to a police patrol car while, from memory, she prayed the psalms aloud. This act of NVDA—of civil disobedience—met the moment of injustice at the South Carolina state house in a way that made a powerful symbolic impact, even though it needed very few people committed to carrying it out. The film of Newsome's act of civil disobedience was widely shared online. Less than two weeks later, on 9 July 2015, South Carolina's House of Representatives voted to permanently remove the flag from the state house grounds.

Framing active nonviolence as a long story within the Christian tradition of work and witness for peace and justice—a story that begins with the early Church and extends to the present day—links these movements and acts of nonviolent resistance over time. Emphasizing the continuity of the story in a new pastoral letter or encyclical demonstrates that active nonviolence is not simply a shiny new tool with which we might experiment, but rather a hope-filled way of life and practice that joins us to Christians throughout history working to build the Kingdom of God in faithfulness to the gospel.

Nonviolence as Discipleship in Community

If a pastoral letter or papal encyclical succeeds in narrating the Christian tradition as one replete with active nonviolence toward peace and justice, then it can effectively claim that active nonviolence is a basic Christian responsibility, rooted in discipleship and in our Christian communities as we seek to conform our lives ever nearer to that of Jesus. Again, the US bishops of 1983 already said as much: to ‘develop nonviolent means of fending off aggression and resolving conflict best reflects the call of Jesus both to love and to justice’. ²³ Active nonviolence is a moral imperative for all Christians, whether we are committed pacifists or just war thinkers. In this way, I concur with those involved in the CNVI who stress centering nonviolence in Christian ethics and witness. ²⁴ A new pastoral letter or encyclical can encourage the communities of the Catholic Church, particularly parishes, to teach and support the work of active nonviolence as the premier pathway for building a just peace.

Nonviolence as a basic component of discipleship should not only encourage Catholics, and all people of good will, to commit themselves to peacemaking through active nonviolence, but in a new document, the hierarchical magisterium should commit to providing substantial support for developing structures of belonging and discernment within parishes for NVDA. Despite the history of active nonviolence in the US—whether through the activism of the Catholic Worker movement or the Civil Rights movement, for example, and the bishops’ own expression of desire for greater attention to active nonviolence, there has been no effort by the US bishops to invest seriously in active nonviolence. Simply put, the Church hierarchy in the US is not a substantial leader when it comes to nonviolent resistance to injustice. In a renewed Challenge, the Church can take up the mantel of leadership by calling on Catholic communities to nurture the discipleship of active nonviolence in at least three ways.

First: In line with the rest of the US population, too many Catholic faithful misunderstand the purpose of marches, rallies, and especially civil disobedience; ²⁵ and too often people believe these strategies to be ineffective and futile despite evidence to the contrary. ²⁶ Thus, Catholics are currently lacking educated witness as to the methods of NVDA, including their virtue and their efficacy. A pastoral letter or encyclical on active nonviolence ought to testify to both. In turn, as the teaching is promulgated and received, clergy, religious, and lay people should extend such a pastoral letter's message by providing educated witness to the virtue and effectiveness of NVDA, and this ought to be done in liturgy through homilies and reflection on Scripture. Clerics may or may not be the best witnesses to active nonviolence, so room should be made for lay people, including women, to preach from their expertise and experience, reflecting on each in the light of the gospel. Educated witness is critical groundwork for building communities that are ready to participate in NVDA because it builds both understanding of the practices of NVDA, and hope in their effectiveness to help engender positive change. Educated witness is an indispensable foundation for countering misinformation about NVDA and for building communities committed to active nonviolence.

Second: A pastoral letter or encyclical should drive parishes to build a cluster of ministries aimed at support for active nonviolence, including programs for training in NVDA; for discerning how to respond to injustices and carrying that response out; and for supporting parishioners who commit to NVDA, especially civil disobedience. Parishes should be encouraged to ensure that some of their members are trained in the methods of active nonviolence and are equipped to train other parishioners. This is in line with the 1983 bishops’ suggestion that ‘citizens [be] trained in the techniques of peaceable noncompliance and noncooperation’. ²⁷ The Church cannot wait for others to take on this role. Instead, Catholic communities must help to lead the work of training citizens, beginning in their own parishes. In the words of poet-activist June Jordan, ‘we are the ones we’ve been waiting for’. ²⁸ If active nonviolence is constitutive of Christian discipleship, then Catholic parishes should be communities of nonviolence, where experts train disciples in the methods of noncompliance and noncooperation, and where Christians are made ready to respond to injustice and violence.

In addition to training, a new pastoral letter or encyclical should call on parishes to maintain response teams ready to participate in nonviolent direct action as the need arises and in coordination with other faith-based and community-organizing groups. These response teams should be equipped to discern together individuals’ participation in discrete acts of NVDA, and especially civil disobedience.

Civil disobedience is a critical tool of NVDA, but it comes with expectations and risks that a new letter or encyclical can make Catholics aware of and begin to prepare them for. Those who engage in civil disobedience can expect to be arrested—an ordeal for which the consequences can range from discomfort, to humiliation, to physical injury. In addition to the initial arrest, however, those who engage in civil disobedience risk legal charges, indictments, and convictions. Civil disobedience often involves a serious impact on the person who carries it out, including consuming a significant amount of their time and energy, potential legal fees, and sentences that may range from fines to prison, to, in the most extreme political situations, execution. For these reasons, civil disobedience should not be understood as a spontaneous decision, or a spur-of-the-moment response to injustice. Instead, a parish's active nonviolence response team should prayerfully discern together who among them may be called to specific acts of civil disobedience being planned in response to injustice. In this way, response teams assume responsibility for leading the parish as a whole in bearing the burden of the consequences of civil disobedience for those individual parishioners who prayerfully engage in it.

Finally, a renewed Challenge or encyclical on nonviolence should urge parishes to collect and maintain a fund for legal expenses related to parishioners’ participation in civil disobedience that emerges from response teams’ discernment. Individual parishes need not maintain these funds alone. They can partner with other parishes and even with other congregations ecumenically and interreligiously. The South African Council of Churches fund for the legal defense of apartheid's political prisoners provides a powerful example of the work that religious communities can do together to support civil disobedience when it is necessary as a tool of nonviolent resistance. Knowing that one has the support—including the financial support—of one's community makes answering a call to civil disobedience more practical for more people, and thus makes a greater impact for justice and peace.

One example of how religious communities can discern and support active nonviolence comes from my experience amongst American Quakers in Boston, where I first encountered the use of war tax resistance as a form of civil disobedience. War tax resistance involves an individual's public refusal to pay income taxes due to their conscientious objection to warfare, either in general or to particular wars. War tax resistors often calculate their tax bill, and even file tax forms, but refuse to pay the bill to the government, and instead direct the money they owe to a nonprofit peacemaking organization. War tax resistors may write letters to tax agencies, government officials, and media explaining their resistance. The point of this resistance is less about money lost to one's government (as this is small in comparison to a military budget like that of the United States), than it is about drawing attention to opposition to war so as to provide witness to peace and an example to others. The Quaker community I lived with in the early 2000s helped to support a woman in discerning and carrying out war tax resistance. Our Quaker residential community provided her with shelter, enabling her to keep her income low enough to avoid serious legal charges. Repeatedly, year after year during the ‘War on Terror’, in Afghanistan and Iraq, she filed a tax return, stated her intent to refuse to pay the bill and direct the money instead to a nonprofit, and publicly acknowledged her civil disobedience through letter-writing campaigns. Catholic parishes, along with ecumenical and interreligious groups, can explore similar means of support for individuals who discern the call to civil disobedience, because to be effective and sustainable, active nonviolence is not merely the work of individuals, but rather it requires supportive communities of resistance.

Clarify the Relationship between Active Nonviolence and the Just War Tradition

Since the CNVI released its Appeal in 2016, scholars have been debating the relationship between active nonviolence and the Catholic just war tradition. A papal encyclical or bishops’ pastoral should help to clarify how the magisterial hierarchy understands that relationship. I, along with a host of other scholars, have argued against the CNVI's suggestion that the Catholic Church ‘no longer use or teach the just war theory’. Instead, I would advise the writers of a renewed challenge to (1) emphasize the centrality and primacy of active nonviolence, while (2) retaining the just war tradition as an indispensable tool for restraining nations’ and nonstate actors’ impulses to war and violence; for engaging in moral analysis of warfare; and for maintaining the right to proportionate self-defense against aggressors or repressors.

As mentioned above, I agree with nearly the entirety of the CNVI's Appeal: a new papal encyclical or episcopal documents should indeed ‘take a clear stand for creative and active nonviolence’. ²⁹ Indeed, such a document should claim that active nonviolence must, from the Christian perspective, be the central focus of campaigns for peace and justice. As I have argued elsewhere, practices of active nonviolence and peacemaking, such as those detailed by the scholars who developed the just peacemaking theory, must be the first and lasting avenue by which Christians seek to address injustice. ³⁰ Such nonviolent practices should be maintained as much as possible even in the midst of war because they can hasten an end to warfare, witness to the dignity of the human person ‘made in the image and likeness of God, whose fundamental right to life generally ought not be violated’, and provide a meaningful role for noncombatants in the midst of war or armed struggle. ³¹

For a variety of reasons, my agreement with the CNVI's Appeal does not extend to its jettisoning of the just war tradition. Instead, I urge that a new episcopal or papal document on nonviolence should clarify the role of the just war tradition in Catholic ethics. Here I briefly discuss three points that ought to be settled in new magisterial documents: First, the just war tradition is a fundamental tool of restraint. Second, it is a valuable means of ethical analysis. Third, it affirms the right to proportionate armed self-defense in extreme situations.

In Christian theology, the just war tradition emerges as a restraining device, when the resort to war is ‘determined to be absolutely necessary to secure a just peace’. ³² While unscrupulous politicians and military leaders unarguably at times view the just war tradition as a checklist of procedures for justifying warfare, this is not its purpose, and to use it this way is an abuse. An episcopal or papal document clarifying the relationship between nonviolence and the just war tradition must be perfectly clear about this: ‘In the spirit of promoting order and advancing the common good’, the purpose of the just war tradition ‘is to reign in the human propensity toward sin and excess and direct us instead toward peace and justice’. ³³ Hence criteria like just cause, right intention, last resort, and proportionality are not tools for justifying warfare but for calling us back from the brink. The just war tradition therefore remains indispensable in a violent world.

Additionally, the Catholic Church should certainly continue to teach and use the just war tradition as an enduringly valuable means of ethical analysis and a critique of violence. When Catholic ethicists say that nuclear weapons are never justifiable, because they are indiscriminate (principle of discrimination/noncombatant immunity) and disproportionate (principle of proportionality) in their effects, this is just war reasoning that seeks to restrain the use of nuclear weapons. ³⁴ When Catholic ethicists critique siege warfare, we do so on just war grounds: it deprives noncombatants of basic necessities such as food, water, and medicine (principle of discrimination/noncombatant immunity). ³⁵ When Catholic ethicists critique Russia's invasion of Ukraine, we use the just war tradition (principles of just cause, last resort, legitimate authority, right intention etc. are all involved). ³⁶

It is notable that even when moral analysis is not explicit in its use of just war reasoning, it is often nevertheless present. For example, in discussing the injustice of war in Fratelli Tutti, Pope Francis implicitly relies on just war criteria. He implicitly appeals to the principle of legitimate authority when discussing the United Nations as an ‘obligatory reference point for justice and a channel of peace’. ³⁷ Likewise, the traditional principle of right intention articulated by Augustine undergirds Francis’s reminder that ‘War can easily be chosen by invoking all sorts of allegedly humanitarian, defensive or precautionary excuses, and even resorting to the manipulation of information’. ³⁸ One thinks of Augustine’s warnings against war motivated by selfish desires or ‘lust for power’. ³⁹ And what is the following but an implicit appeal to the principle of proportionality: ‘We can no longer think of war as a solution, because its risks will probably always be greater than its supposed benefits’? ⁴⁰ The claims that Pope Francis makes in Fratelli Tutti about the injustice of war rely on moral analysis provided by the just war tradition and its criteria. To make a choice to no longer use or teach this tradition is terribly misguided because it misunderstands the tradition as a tool for justifying violence rather than restraining and morally analyzing it. To purge the just war tradition from Catholic teaching would cripple Catholic thinkers’ capacities to credibly and effectively critique real-world violence.

Finally, since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, many Catholic ethicists have argued for the renewed relevance of the just war tradition insofar as it affirms the right to self-defense against aggression. This is an affirmation that appeared unequivocally in the Challenge, as the US bishops stated: ‘governments threatened by armed, unjust aggression must defend their people. This includes defense by armed force, if necessary, as a last resort.’ ⁴¹ In clarifying the role of the just war tradition in Catholic ethics, a new papal or episcopal document ought to continue to affirm this right to defense, while nevertheless centering nonviolence.

A Budget for Peace

In a renewed Challenge, the US bishops should once again critically engage the enormous military budget of the United States and draw on both Catholic social teaching and sociological evidence to argue for a decrease in that budget and an increase in spending on serious human needs. While the bishops of 1983 expressed reluctance to involve themselves in hashing out the specifics of the federal budget, they nevertheless expressed a sense of obligation to comment on ‘the moral dimension[s]’ of budgetary planning insofar as they impact the ability to carry out robust commitments to support the dignity of human beings and to build peace and justice. ⁴² The bishops went so far as to ‘urge that funds equivalent to a designated percentage … of current budgetary allotments for military purposes be set aside to support … peace research’. ⁴³ The US bishops also discussed the moral dimensions of the federal budget in their 1986 pastoral letter Economic Justice for All, noting that, at the time ‘over 60% of the entire federal research and development budget [went] to the military’. ⁴⁴ Moreover, the call to decrease military spending in order to focus on humanitarian aid has been echoed over the course of several papacies, including most recently Pope Francis. ‘It is our responsibility’, the Pope has remarked, ‘to help eradicate hatred and violence from hearts. We encourage you to lay down your arms, to reduce military spending to provide for humanitarian needs, to convert the tools of death into tools of life’. ⁴⁵ Sadly, the US federal budget still prioritizes military and defense spending dramatically over expenditure on other serious human needs.

The defense budget in the US for fiscal year 2023 was $816.7 billion. ⁴⁶ In fiscal year 2022, the military budget at $801 billion was greater than that of the next highest nine countries’ military spending combined. ⁴⁷ Meanwhile 38 million Americans live below the government's official poverty line. ⁴⁸ Yet the federal budget for economic security programs was $552 billion for fiscal year 2023. ⁴⁹ In addition, inequalities in public education in the US, related to how education is funded at the local level through property tax dollars, essentially ensures that economic inequality will remain entrenched in US society. For 2025, the Biden administration has requested $82 billion for the federal Department of Education budget. ⁵⁰ As the bishops have described in the past, in the richest nation in the world, we nevertheless tolerate an alarming level of poverty and inequality. ⁵¹ A prophetic pastoral letter on nonviolence for the US would address this inequity and name the bloated military budget as a place for cuts to reprioritize the basic needs of the American poor.

The Rejection of Gun Culture

A pastoral letter on active nonviolence, peace, and justice in the US must call Catholics to become leaders in resisting American gun culture, and advocating for legislation that prioritizes the regulation and decreased circulation of handguns and military-style assault rifles. It is no secret around the world that many Americans idolize guns and prioritize a perceived right to gun ownership over other important rights, including the rights to public safety, peace, and education. A vignette from my 2014 travel to Nairobi to participate in a conference on peacebuilding and transitional justices demonstrates the US reputation in this matter. The 2014 conference was being held in part because Kenyans had been dealing with a spate of election-related political violence, and scholars came together to discuss preventing further violence, supporting democracy, and promoting reconciliation. ⁵² Over a meal, a Kenyan scholar participating in the conference enquired as to where I was from. When I said I came from the US he replied, ‘Oh my goodness, the US, I would never want to live there. Your people shoot your children in their schools.’ The horrific massacre of school children at Newtown, Connecticut had occurred two years earlier and the international community was well aware of the problem of gun violence in the US. While many Americans desire to view the US as an exceptional nation where individuals can pursue freedom in peace, the reality is that the country is profoundly violent, and a new pastoral letter should address this violence.

The statistics on gun violence in the US are harrowing and demand a serious and sustained response from Catholic leaders. Sandy Hook Promise, an anti-gun organization that emerged in the wake of the Newtown school shooting, estimates that 12 children die from gun violence every day in the US and another thirty-two are injured. Unimaginably, guns are the leading cause of death among US children. ⁵³ Since the 1999 school shooting in Columbine, Colorado—an event that many use to mark the beginning of the current crisis of American school shootings—394 school shootings have occurred. This means that 360,000 US children have experienced gun violence at school since 1999. ⁵⁴

Despite this incredible carnage, the American Catholic bishops have collectively said little about gun violence. Indeed, the USCCB website's ‘Topics’ page, which explains that this is where ‘you will find information and resources to learn more about the Church, what the Church teaches, and how to grow in your faith’, includes links to a host of social issues including racism, assisted suicide, and the environment, but there is no reference to gun violence. ⁵⁵ In 2022, four bishops who are chairmen of USCCB committees issued a statement to Congress on gun violence, ⁵⁶ but Catholics have heard little from their bishops since then, and there has been no sustained call for laity and clergy to work together against this scourge. By contrast, the bishops’ ‘Fortnight for Freedom’ campaign to protect religious liberty (particularly regarding the right of Catholic institutions not to provide healthcare insurance to their employees that includes access to artificial contraception) is an annual two-week-long nationwide event scheduled to culminate each year on July 4, American Independence Day. Throughout the Fortnight, clergy are encouraged to preach on religious liberty, and Catholic laity are encouraged to pray about it and protect it through their political participation. If the US bishops gave such sustained attention to religious liberty, why not the violence related to America's sad obsession with guns? A renewed Challenge must surely address this and act as a catalyst for sustained advocacy for gun reform.

Media and Misinformation

Finally, a newly issued pastoral letter for peace and justice in the US context ought to reflect seriously on the role that media sometimes play in promoting mischaracterizations of active nonviolence. In recent years, it has become clear that misinformation and disinformation is an enormous problem, and not only in the United States. Pope Francis addressed the role that social media and technology play in fomenting discord in Fratelli Tutti. ⁵⁷ It is now incumbent upon Catholic leaders in the US to deal with the particular iterations of misinformation that lead some Americans to think of protest as chaotic lawlessness rather than one form of active nonviolence and, therefore, Christian discipleship. In the US, much media focuses intensely on the rare moments when nonviolent protest transitions into violence, such as rioting, looting, and destruction of property. For example, the Black Lives Matter movement organized over 7000 protests in cities across the US in the wake of the murder of George Floyd in the summer of 2020. Some of these protests began peacefully and transitioned to violence. The violence gained massive media coverage. Today, many Americans with whom I discuss active nonviolence agree with it in theory as a useful method for addressing injustice, but eschew it in practice. They are fearful of engaging in protest because of what they have seen reported in the news. They worry that they will be caught up in a violent melee and sustain injuries or even be killed. Meanwhile, reliable studies have shown that well over 90 per cent of those 2020 protests following the police killing of George Floyd were entirely peaceful, and most physical violence that did occur was committed by police officers against protesters. ⁵⁸ The likelihood of an American protestor (perhaps especially a white American) being caught up in violence at a protest is quite low. While it is understandable for the media to report when peaceful protest becomes violent, it is critical for the media not to sensationalize riots or present them out of the larger context of peaceful NVDA. A pastoral letter should explore American's perceptions of protest, just as bishops of 1986 explored American perceptions of poverty. Regarding poverty, the bishops named misperceptions about government assistance to the poor, and stereotypes of poor people, and asked that we ‘refrain from actions, words, or attitudes that stigmatize the poor’. ⁵⁹ A pastoral letter on active nonviolence should similarly address the role media play in shaping misperceptions of active nonviolence, and urge us to refrain from actions, words, or attitudes that discourage it, or characterize protest as inherently or inevitably violent.