By Dr. Mubarak Awad *<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On October 2, Nonviolence Day, I want to ask a question that is not political first, but human and spiritual: When will we learn not to kill or destroy? From a Christian perspective, this is not optional. Jesus did not teach that love should be replaced by hatred when conflict becomes difficult. He taught that God’s way is not the way of destruction. Therefore, Christian nonviolence is not weakness. It is moral courage, the courage to refuse killing even when the world calls it \u201chonor,\u201d \u201csecurity,\u201d or \u201cnecessity.\u201d If Christians are serious about the Gospel, we must take nonviolence seriously.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
People often imagine nonviolence as simply \u201cnot fighting.\u201d But Christian nonviolence is deeper than that. It is refusing the authority of oppression. It refuses to cooperate with injustice, whether that injustice comes through military force, occupation, religious fanaticism, or the manipulation of fear. Nonviolence says: My conscience will not be trained to hate. My faith will not be used as a license to harm. Because fear is one of the oppressor\u2019s strongest tools, Christian nonviolence also requires overcoming fear. We must learn a kind of courage that does not surrender our values: courage to act with discipline, restraint, and humanity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I did not come to these convictions by forcing my faith on anyone. I sought truth shared across faith communities, and I studied Islam and nonviolence with seriousness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nonviolence often grows slowly because power is afraid, and governments delay. In recent decades, societies across different religions have moved toward radical interpretations, and those interpretations allow minorities within each religion to dictate what the religion must mean. When that happens, killing becomes easier to justify, and ethical reasoning becomes harder to trust. Nonviolence must therefore resist two obstacles at once. One is religious radicalism, which treats violence as honor instead of recognizing it as a moral failure. The other is political institutionalism, which treats nonviolence as \u201cnot the right time,\u201d or even as weakness. Too often both sides in conflict become trapped in the same logic: they decide that violence is inevitable or that change cannot happen now. Yet the Christian claim is that change is possible because God is not limited by human brutality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
History offers evidence that nonviolence can change the direction of societies without endless slaughter. The Soviet Union moved away without the world being consumed by perpetual extermination. Apartheid ended without requiring the constant renewal of violence. The Berlin Wall fell. The civil rights movement advanced. Even in the painful conflict in Northern Ireland, the path toward peace became real over time. The lesson is not that suffering disappears instantly, but that a moral trajectory can shift. Conflict can be forced to resolve itself without requiring endless bodies. That is why the real question is not simply \u201cCan peace happen?\u201d but \u201cHow do we push toward peace with fewer refugees, fewer widows, and fewer orphans?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Conflicts and problems do not vanish by themselves, but hostility is not destiny. Where shared life already exists, the mind learns another future. People can sit together, eat together, and plan for children and grandchildren. In places like Jerusalem, where each community can become trapped in the belief that God is on our side and therefore destruction is commanded, nonviolence struggles to survive. Christian nonviolence cannot be housed inside a theology that demands enemies be removed. It must be rooted in a faith that recognizes every human being as created by God and capable of repentance and change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Christian nonviolence must also be connected to justice inside society. It must include gender equality. When men hide behind religion to oppress women, they often treat patriarchy as inevitable and violence as acceptable. But if we do not have equality in political life, violence will continue to find cover inside social injustice. Even in democratic settings, equality remains incomplete when women are excluded from power and voice. Therefore, nonviolence is not only peace with others. It is justice within our own communities, because a society that tolerates humiliation and exclusion will struggle to practice restraint toward those it labels as \u201cother.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Now, the refugee question is at the heart of this tragic conflict. If there is a two-state solution, then those who lived in Palestine have the right to return, and those displaced who choose to remain elsewhere should be able to live with dignity through citizenship in their country of residence. People displaced in Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere also need a place to live, because home is not a luxury; it is a human need and a sacred question. Treating refugees as a threat denies the Christian understanding that every displaced person is a neighbor in pain. I reject the idea that welcoming refugees is weakness. If refugees are received with safety and dignity, they will not become a new enemy. Fear must be replaced with hope.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On this Day of Nonviolence, I pray for the moral courage to refuse killing. God of mercy, teach us not to kill. Teach us to seek justice without hatred. Make our faith a path of reconciliation, not a weapon. Let the courage of nonviolence become real in our streets, our parliaments, and our hearts. Amen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n