What is the understanding of the Church of the Brethren in Nigeria as to the Brethren heritage of pacifism? The questions to explore are: Do Nigerian Brethren join the armed forces? Are there some Brethren who through pacifism reached a point of being conscientious objectors? If yes, are they able to impress on the government of Nigeria to consider conscientious objectors?
There are many people including Christians who perceive the notion of pacifism as a blind way of rejecting war and violence and worst of all a pacifist as an irrational person or a religious zealot. Some do look at pacifism and pacifists as being associated with pessimism. Because Pacifism and Pessimism are alike. Some hardly distinguish between the two, or end up looking at pacifism through the lens of pessimism. Cadoux comments this in the following way:
Pacifists have been accused of cowardice, sentimentality, indifference to righteousness, heresy of a Marcionite, Manichaean, or Pelagian type, literalism, legalism, evasion, intellectual confusion and inconsistency: They have insultingly been dubbed ‘pseudo-Quakers’: jokes have been made about their pugnacity as sadly out
32
of keeping with their peace-principles: their zeal for peace has been censured as a claim that none but they were zealous for it:49
Are these criticisms appropriate? What then is pacifism? Secular definition of the term may be helpful at this stage. The BBC English Dictionary defines ‘Pacifism’ to mean,
“The belief that war and violence are always wrong.”50 This secular definition does not portray the pacifist as being irrational or cowardice, but a person who sees war and violence as always, not sometimes but always wrong. Yoder defines pacifism as a
“view which accepts no war as morally permissible.”51 Going by Yoder’s definition and if we accept it, then many people would be pacifists as even Niebuhr who was one of the most profound critic of pacifism could not disagree. Niebuhr says,
It is a terrible thing to take human life. The conflict between man and man nation and nation is tragic. If they are men who declare that, no matter what consequences, they can not bring themselves to participate in this slaughter, the church ought to be able to say to the general community: We quite understand the scruple and we respect it. It proceeds from the conviction that the true end of man is brotherhood, and that love is the law of life.52
Wicker gives a comprehensive definition of the term pacifism this way, “Pacifism is the refusal for conscientious reasons to fight in wars or submit to military discipline.
Historically speaking pacifism has been predominantly a Christian phenomenon, although today there are many pacifists groups based on other religions (Budhism, for instance) or on none. Pacifism is closely linked to, but distinct from, the practice of non-violent action, such as that by Ghandhi or Martin Luther King.”53 Robbins gave us a definition of the term with some important historical facts; she says pacifism, “Is the opposition to war and violence. The word pacifism was coined by the French Peace Campaigner Emile Arnaud (1864-1921) and adopted by other peace activists at the tenth Universal Peace Congress in Glasgow in 1901.”54
49 Cecil John Cadoux, Christian Pacifism Re-examined, (Oxford: Basil Blackwell), 1940:5-6.
50 John Sinclair, Editor in Chief, “Pacifism” BBC English Dictionary, (BBC English and HarperCollins Publishers Ltd), 1992.
51 John Howard Yoder, When War is Unjust: Being Honest in Just-War Thinking, 2nd ed., (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books), 1996:1.
52 Reinhold Niebuhr, Christianity and Power Politics, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1952.
53 Brian Wicker, “Pacifism” The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought, (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 2000:508-509:509.
54 Keith Robbins, The Abolition of War: The Peace Movement in Britain, 1914-1919, (Wales: University of Wales Press), 1976:11
33
Looking at the above definitions, what then is the position of EYN on Pacifism? In answer to this question, an examination of Church of the Brethren in Nigeria theologians as to what they say is cardinal. Mambula holds to the view that the Church of the Brethren in Nigeria is a pacifist church, which epitomizes the finding of his book entitled, “Are There Limits to Pacifism? The Nigerian Dilemma.” This book was written under the premise that the Church is a pacifist church, but the question he wrestled with is whether there are limits to pacifism due to seemingly unending, unprovoked persecution, arsons, killings, massacres, destructions perpetrated against Christians and their properties in Nigeria by Muslim Fundamentalists and extremists over the years. He gives expression to his conviction that the church is a pacifist church, and underlines:
In the face of increasing Islamic militancy that has claimed many lives of Christians, and resulted in the destruction of their homes and properties in Nigeria, even the EYN leadership and rank and file are beginning to ask this question. The pacifist stance of the church, per se, is not in question, but Christian communities on the
‘front line’ are looking for practical answers in terms of what can be considered legitimate self-defense and, for that, they may need to rely on the armed forces or the police of the state.55
It is interesting to note that many Brethren in Nigeria joined the armed forces. Some interestingly joined the armed forces during the Missionary era as stated above. As mentioned earlier and severally too, such who joined the military were not applauded by the missionaries. Many of the parents of those who were conscripted into the military more especially during the World War II have been advised against allowing their children going into armed forces. This is not just for any reason but due to the belief in peace and pacifism. One striking revelation is that many Church of the Brethren members who joined the armed forces today have lots of difficulties when it comes to matter of taking human life. The life story of Corporal David Ciwar who was a Church of the Brethren in Nigeria member but serving with the Nigerian Army stands as typical example. Ciwar was sent to Jos the Plateau State Capital in 2010 along with his other colleagues on a peace mission when religious crisis broke out under the Special Task Force to restore peace. Some youths who were reacting to the arson and killings were marching into the town. A colleague of Ciwar told Ciwar that they should
55 Musa A Mambula, Are There Limits to Pacifism? The Nigerian Dilemma, (Kaduna: Prudent Universal Press), 2009:163.
34
fire riffles at the youths and Ciwar objected by telling his colleague, ‘we are sent to restore peace and not to kill.’ He went over to the youths and was pleading with them to withdraw from the streets. But Ciwar was shot dead by that same colleague under the pretense of ‘accidental discharge.’ This action generated further reaction and this was a testimony of another colleague of Ciwar at Ciwar’s funeral service. Ciwar objected to firing the youths due to his belief in peace and pacifism. The above action further reveals to us that belief in peace and pacifism is much more than just adhering to a concept, it is indeed incarnating a life-style that depends on another model, i.e. a way of costly discipleship in Christ. In the Church of the Brethren, there are lots of emphasis on ‘Counting the Cost’ or ‘the Cost of Discipleship. There are practical and tangible life style being demonstrated and displayed by many members of the Church of the Brethren in Nigeria serving as combatants with the Nigeria Armed Forces that show that peace and pacifism is deep rooted in them.
The story of Malam Risku and how he stopped war between people as far back as 1946 was a cherished life story even among the missionaries and among many Church of the Brethren members. Hackman reports,
One day in 1946, Malam Risku, Mr. Kulp and other missionaries trekked to the surroundings of Gwoza. They rested near a well.
While there they discovered that the Fulani people of the area were preparing for war. The missionaries did not know what they should do. However, Malam Risku had an idea… M. Risku took one of his shoes and held it over his head. He went to the Fulani’s place and talked with them. The people recognized the sign of the shoe over his head, and they agreed to listen to what Malam Risku had to say. Then Malam Risku explained to them that he is a messenger of the King of Peace. He offered to help them talk about their differences. The people agreed and the war did not take place… He brought peace between the people there. He showed them that God wants peace and the well-being of his people.56
This is strong evidence to the fact that peacemaking is part and parcel of the Nigerian Brethren self-understanding and the impact of dialogue. Fulani people were not Christians and they were not planning for war against Christians. The peacemaking effort of Malam Risku was not informed by selfishness, in other words not because the war was planned against people of his faith. The war was not planned against his tribal or clan but against fellow human beings. The pacifist nature of the brethren that
56 Hackman, Introduction to Brethren History, p. 105.
35
all wars are wrong is exhibited. The question is how did Malam Risku know what to do? The biography of Malam Risku reveals that he had served as a shepherd boy among the Fulani people and knows their customs that when one has his/her shoe over his/her head is a sign of peace and not war. Though this still involves risk and giving of self for the sake of those whom he did not know. But Risku took the risk, in other words, he counted the cost and through that broker peace through dialogue.