[lit-ideas] Re: 21. century European anti-Semitism
- From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 11:15:26 -0400
Omar Kusturica wrote:
"The first-century Christians were only a community in the making, and
lacked any mechanisms for organized self-defense, which doesn't mean
that they had no need for it."
In the first few centuries, Christians did indeed defend themselves in
various ways but not through physical force. The Church rejected any
use of the sword and up until the time of Constantine refused active
soldiers from joining.
Tertullian (145-220 C.E.):
"Shall it be held lawful to make an occupation of the sword, when the
Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword shall perish by the sword? And
shall the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not become
him even to sue at law?" (On the Crown)
"For albeit soldiers had come unto John, and had received the formula of
their rule; albeit, likewise, a centurion had believed; still the Lord
afterward, in disarming Peter, unbelted every soldier." (On Idolatry)
And the decision of Nicea (325 C.E)
"Those who have been called by grace, have given evidence of first
fervour and have cast off their [military] belts, and afterwards have
run back like dogs to their own vomit, so that some have even paid money
and recovered their military status by bribes ? such persons shall spend
ten years as prostrators after a period of three years as hearers."
I will refrain from commenting on whether the Church's change of
position on the sword was a good or bad thing.
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
Toronto, ON
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
