September 22, 2006 Silver Spring, Maryland, United States …. [Elizabeth Lechleitner/ANN]
Where have all the Desmond Dosses gone? Epitomizing the traditional position advocated by Seventh-day Adventists during wartime, Doss was a World War II United States Army medic who refused to carry a weapon, yet earned the Congressional Medal of Honor for single-handedly rescuing 75 wounded soldiers amid a blitz of enemy bullets on the island of Okinawa, Japan.
Ever since the Adventist church’s beginnings, its official statements and members’ behavior have generally reflected an equal commitment to nonviolence.
But today, an estimated 7,500 Adventists serve in the United States military. And virtually all of them are enlisted as combatants, barring the 50 chaplains classed as noncombatants by the Geneva Convention, says Chaplain Gary R. Councell, the associate director of Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries at the headquarters of the world church.
Councell has observed that Adventists in some other nations also serve their respective militaries voluntarily. But Reinder Bruinsma, president of the Adventist church in the Netherlands, disagrees.
“I can only talk for Holland, ” he says, “but I think that the European attitude toward serving in the military in combat roles more reflects Adventist tradition than in the States. The kind of shift in attitude among Adventists–where you serve your country by fighting–is largely an American phenomenon.”
Ekkehardt Mueller, associate director of the Biblical Research Institute at the world church headquarters, echoes this attitude. He maintains that “there has been a conscious effort by the church in Germany to discourage involvement in the army. From my experience as a division and union leader and as a pastor [in Germany], I know of only one Adventist [in Germany] who joined the army as a combatant.”
Mueller also notes that much of the German reticence toward active military service stems from its traumatic experience during World War II, which, clarifies Bruinsma, “may still linger in the collective Adventist European consciousness.”
Bruinsma says Europe, in large part, no longer issues a draft, which tends to eliminate the issue of armed service altogether. Both Councell and Doug Morgan, director of the Adventist Peace Fellowship, say the absence of the draft may have influenced Adventist military involvement in the United States differently. In fact, most scholars cite the 1970s–more accurately, the cessation of conscription in ’74–as the turning point in Adventist attitudes toward military service.
Morgan allows that “The church’s historic position always assumed the pressure of a military draft. The ideal wasn’t some kind of absolute church ‘law’ or test of fellowship. People in varying situations and under varying types of government had to do their best in accordance with their consciences.”
But, he points out, “Prior to the 1970s, the thought of a practicing church member volunteering for a combat role in the military would have been inconceivable to the vast majority of Adventists.” Not so anymore.
In many countries, such as Korea, involuntary military service remains a troubling auxiliary issue. Adventists in those countries still face strict conscription laws, opposition to which more often than not lands them in prison where Sabbath-keeping and adhering to dietary laws is extremely difficult. And then there are countries such as Israel, where citizens are required to serve as reservists subject to call until age 50.
Clearly, “there are many legal, moral, and practical considerations when it comes to military service on a global scale,” says Councell. And draft or no draft, in an increasingly volatile and violent world, he says maintaining total neutrality is difficult.
Determining why attitudes have shifted intrigues Councell. He holds current socioeconomic conditions–for example, the exorbitant cost of college education in the United States and the government’s promise to help cover it in exchange for military service–largely responsible for Adventists enlisting in the military in record numbers. Post-draft Adventists “have tended to ignore the matter and no longer wrestle with the ethics of military service,” he says.
While skirting the issue might have worked post-Vietnam when the majority of citizens were particularly disenchanted with the brutal reality of warfare, Councell has noticed that young people today–Adventists included–are likely to view the military as a viable career option. Why? Because it offers stability and a sense of belonging, says Councell.
Bruinsma notes that “it would be considered very unusual” if an Adventist young person in the Netherlands were to choose a military career.
“In Europe, it’s still a feeling by and large that serving in the military is not according to Adventists principles. Many people do feel that there are potential problems with that position. What about police and other public servants? Do we just leave this to others and profit from what they do? That is a problem. But, still I think that European Adventists are far more reluctant to serve than their American counterparts,” reiterates Bruinsma.
That doesn’t mean European Adventists never serve in military positions, however. Roman Chalupka, secretary of the Adventist church in Poland, reports that some young Polish Adventists do choose to join the military, but that it “is their decision and their own responsibility.” He says the Polish church does not advocate military service, but nor does it “press anybody to avoid the army.”
Of young American Adventist enlistees, Councell worries that many join without so much as considering the consequences. Larry Roth, a former Navy chaplain and Adventist Peace Fellowship member, agrees. “With near zero training on the subject and very few ‘experts’ in the church available to counsel those youth who raise the issue, it is fully understandable why today very few of our youth see combatancy as an issue. They are not getting any counsel on the topic–at school, at church, and probably not at home. It is too late once they sign up with the recruiter.”
Both chaplains Roth and Councell reiterate the conscience-driven nature of this issue. The “church would support them in whatever position they took,” Roth says, referring to the Adventist young people he counseled during his years as a chaplain.
Above all, Councell says, it is unfair to single out the issue of noncombatancy. He views slackening attitudes toward active combat as a symptom of a larger issue: a general shift in the values climate of Adventism, reflecting current socio-cultural trends.
On the possible cause-and-effect relationship between a person’s cultural context and stance on noncombatancy, Bruinsma says “things are usually a little more complicated than that.”
“The whole attitude and relationship toward government may be much more different in America than here,” Bruinsma points out. “America feels it has this role to play in the world. Many Europeans wish America didn’t feel compelled to play that role.” He allows, however, that “just as American Adventists are part of an environment of reflecting local cultural values, so Europe takes a back seat position, profiling ourselves as having a pacifist attitude. There is less of a desire to see a big army.”
Because the issue of noncombatancy is inherently conscience-driven and opinions are highly nuanced, it will likely continue to trigger debate among church leaders and scholars. However, there is broad consensus among Adventists that the issue should not serve as a wedge between members.
Neither should it become a “blind spot” between leaders, says Mueller. “We as a world church have to listen to each other. There are problems in America, and problems in Europe, and leaders [in both places] would do well to listen to other parts of the church and consider what they have to say.”
At a recent press conference in Cameroon, Pastor Jan Paulsen, president of the Adventist world church, remarked that “using weapons is an inhumane solution to situations that can be solved. There is a better way to live together and that is to co-exist rather than war.”
“We must prayerfully and principally seek moral and spiritual counsel regarding this issue,” advises Councell. “There is room for differences of opinion and viewpoint. We are all finite individuals and situations are often imposed upon us.” But that doesn’t change our core commitment to the well-being of humanity, he adds.
And he believes that commitment sometimes demands action. “We have a moral obligation to defend the innocent and helpless, and if you neglect that I think you have shirked your Christian duty. However, [chaplains] are not advocating killing or the use of weapons and force. Killing during wartime may be necessary in some instances, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t leave scars. It does.”
The ideal, is of course, to find a way to protect and help the innocent nonviolently, such as Desmond Doss. Or John Weidner, a Dutchman who organized the Dutch-Paris underground and rescued some 1,000 Jews and other refugees during World War II.
Referring to Weidner, Councell says, “Here’s a man in the midst of a tragedy who found a way to save life rather than take it.” It is this sort of Christ-like sacrificial love and compassion for humanity that Morgan hopes Adventists will be able to inspire by example.
“I think it would be terribly unfortunate,” Morgan concludes, “if the recognition of complex, even excruciating moral dilemmas in the world with regard to military service were to prevent us from constantly keeping first and foremost the question of what it means to follow Jesus, to commit our lives each day to His peacemaking purposes, to be true to the agenda of His kingdom. Doing that, I think, could make a huge difference for our witness in the world, and for how we work through its ethical complexities.”
Copyright (c) 2006 by Adventist News Network.
