Soldiers are not Murderers

Waiapu Church Gazette, Volume 36, Issue 6, 1 September 1945, Page 3

Soldiers are not Murderers

A Soldier Solves the Conflict between his Conscience and Duty to his Country. (Reprinted by the N.Z.R.S.A. "Review" from ''Progress Guide," U.S.A.) .Not long ago a minister of a well-known church heard that. l had gone into the Army. Upon hearing of this, my friend, whom I loved very much, felt duty bound to tell me that he "was disappointed because I did not registered as a "conscientious objector" rather than choose to be a "murderer m the eyes of God." At first I was greatly disturbed over this. However, after I regained a more normal state of mind I answered his letter and set forth what I believe to be the true relationship of a soldier to his God. Later I realised that similar confusion may exist m the minds of ' other soldiers or of their loved ones. Convinced that I have arrived at the correct answer to this problem, I decided that "Progress Guide" would best serve as a medium for presenting my views to the public. If the letter to my minister, as reproduced here, comforts one mother or frees one soldier from fear over his stand before God I shall not have written m vain.— Private Albert G.- Fowler. -•

Dear Pastor, — Yes, I can realised that you are handicapped m corresponding at length with me under present conditions. However, I would like to say that your efforts are appreciated. You have inspired me to consider my present condition before God from every point of view. Without any thought of victory over you and m humble spirit, I conclude that the Bible references you used m support of your contentions serve only to confirm my own position. Therefore, I shall try to convince you that soldiers are not murderers m the eyes of God. Ido not say that no soldier can be a murderer. Please understand that I am defending, my own position before God. As you know, I was drafted according to law into the service of my country. I have examined both sides of the question with as little bias as possible. Ido not support any particular popular opinion m this matter, and I shall riot seek to justify myself by perverting the word of God. Like yourself, I will let the Bible be the mediator between us. But I cannot agree with your interpretation and" application of the physical, economic and social laws as set forth m the Bible. The wrong interpretation and application of these laws leads you to believe that soldiers are murderers before God.

Then, since you believe the covenants God made with Israel pertain to morals only, you conclude that man is, therefore, only a moral being. You fail to see man as also a physical, economic and social being m- his relationship to the laws of God. For this reason a*ll your standards for * men are applied . merely m a moral sense. This is my objection to the argument m your letter. Social Laws f God. .Since I hold that you have overlooked the social laws of God, I realise that I must prove that these laws are contained m the Covenant, and if I, do this, either you should abandon your faith m the teachings of the Bible or you must agree with .me that His social laws are just as binding on us as are His moral laws. The laws set forth m the Covenant assure us God recognises that man's relationship to others and man's relationship to God are- integral parts of the one life man lives. I hold that the Bible teaches that man has a social responsibility to the State, which governs his actions; that he is bound by this responsibility whether or not his act is voluntary or directed by the State. Your error, I feel, is that you confuse the moral laws regulating the voluntary acts of • *an individual m an ordered society with the social laws applying to in-

voluntary acts such as those governing the lives of citizens m time of war. If I analyse your views correctly, you are attempting to apply moral laws — meant to govern only voluntary acts—^to every " relationship of man to society, for you say, "Man's relationship to himself m his own conscience comes first m every act of life — voluntary and involuntary." . ' , Granted that all voluntary acts should conform to His moral laws, what position should one take about His social laws concerning men's in-, voluntary acts? In his First Epistle, St. Peter says that we should submit ourselves to every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake: "Whether it be to the king, as supreme, or unto governors, as unto them that 'are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. For so is the will of God." • What St. Paul Wrote. Likewise, m his Epistle to the Romans, Paul writes: "Let every soul be subject to higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be. ordained are of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil." , The best example of why man's consideration of his own conscience should not always come first is Christ's attitude as He faced death: "Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me : nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt." In like manner, as Jesus did not wish to die on the Cross, so I do not wish to die on the battlefield. According to the Scriptures quoted above, it is the will of God that I obey my country's laws. So, even though I love all people everywhere, I had no choice but to obey my country's call. When His moral law says, "Thou shalt not kill," and my country says, "You are to kill," which way must I go? I must forego my conscience which governs voluntary acts; for I cannot obey myself and the State at the same time, doing opposite things. Therefore, when I obey the State m fighting for my country, I also obey His words: "Obey every law of man for His sake." But just because His social law commands me to obey the State, must X surrender His moral laws governing- my voluntary acts? No more so than Jesus had to hate all the people who caused His death. Did He not cry out: "Father, forgive them, for. they know not what they do"? " ... Worse Than an Infidel

' Now, testing your position by my own case, let's assume that I had taken your advice when I received my draft call. Had I registered as a conscientious objector, I would now be serving m a conscientious objectors' camp. The Government would be paying me $5 per month. I would be away from my wife and child, as I am now. Disregarding the Apostle Paul's warning of a penalty for disobeying the State, I would still be faced with' this statement m the First Epistle to Timothy: "If any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith and is worse than an infidel." Moreover, I would still have a struggle with my conscience, because .my wife and child would receive no support . from the State while I was m the CO. camp. Nor could I provide for them m the event of my death m the service. - Furthermore, I hold that neither you nor I can decide whether our country is right or wrong. That responsibility rests with our elected officers. I also maintain the Bible provides for no challenge of the State m such matters. We should have acted 20 years ago to avoid this war — not after Congress has declared a state of war. If our elected representatives are irresponsible, it is our fault for electing ungodly men to represent us. If I die on a battlefield, perhaps it will demonstrate to future generations that "the wages of sin is- death; but the gift of God is eternal life." Finally, I am convinced that you, after careful thought, will agree. that no man can actually escape responsibility for some part m his country's war. For you to avoid equal guilt with me — to use your own language —for "all the murders committed m this war," you must cease to accept any money for your services as a clergyman. Practically all money m circulation is paid out for the products of labour m industries making war materials and of ..farms raising war food. You are. accepting money which comes from industrialists and agriculturists who obeyed the call of their country ,to make articles for war. Contributing to Victory. Though a conscientious objector, you contribute toward victory. If you buy merchandise, it carries as part of the price you pay a certain amount of tax which goes to the Government to be used to carry on the war. In fact, though you have overlooked it, you are helping to buy guns and ammunition I use to kill our country's enemies. Aren't you obeying a law of the State when you

pay taxes to. carry on. the war? Then, why is one law of the State holy and another of the same State unholy, when both laws support the same war? Do you feel the guilt of a murderer m your heart when paying these taxes? Does this make you feel less respect for the laws of God which guide tout moral life? Then you know exactly how I feel toward my fellow-man as I shoot the ammunition which your tax money helps to buy. But there is still another difference between N us : You do not know how it feels to be shot at by Qur enemies. Since I ami writing to you as a friend and minister, I deem it fitting to close with words ..from the Epistle of Jude: "Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy* to the only wise God our Saviour, .be .glory .and .majesty, dominion and power, both, now and ever, Amen."