2025/12/17

Jim’s Essays – Jim and Nancy Forest

Jim’s Essays – Jim and Nancy Forest

Jim’s Essays

New

Autobiographical and family related

Miscellaneous writings

Orthodox Church related

  • Conscience and War: Saying Yes, Saying No

    • Interviews and profiles

    Daniel Berrigan related

    Dorothy Day related

    Posted by at

    An Orthodox Resource Book on War, Peace and Nationalism

    Google Gemini


    For the Peace from Above
    An Orthodox Resource Book
    on War, Peace and Nationalism
    Revised Edition

    Edited by Fr. Hildo Bos & Jim Forest 
    --- 
    https://jimandnancyforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/For-the-Peace-from-Above-rev-2-2011.pdf
    ----
    1,000 words in English summary + review please.

    For the Peace from Above: An Orthodox Resource Book on War, Peace and Nationalism is a seminal collection that addresses one of the most complex intersections in Eastern Orthodox theology: the tension between the "Prince of Peace" and the historical realities of conflict and national identity.

    Edited by the late Jim Forest (a renowned peace activist) and Fr. Hildo Bos, this revised edition serves as both a historical record and a moral compass for the contemporary Church.

    Part 1: Detailed Summary
    The book is structured as a "resource book" rather than a single narrative, compiling patristic texts, liturgical prayers, official church statements, and modern theological essays. Its primary goal is to retrieve the Orthodox "mind" regarding violence, which has often been obscured by state-aligned nationalism (phyletism).

    1. The Liturgical and Patristic Foundation
    The title is derived from the "Great Litany" of the Orthodox Divine Liturgy: "For the peace from above... let us pray to the Lord." The book begins by establishing that peace is not merely the absence of war, but a gift of the Holy Spirit.

    The Early Church: It highlights that for the first three centuries, Christians were largely pacifist. The book includes writings from early Fathers like Justin Martyr and Clement of Alexandria, who viewed the "army of the spirit" as incompatible with the "army of Caesar."

    The Canons: It addresses the "Basilican" tradition (St. Basil the Great), which, while acknowledging the necessity of defense, suggested that soldiers who kill in war should abstain from Holy Communion for three years as a period of repentance. This underscores a key Orthodox distinctiveness: there is no "Just War" theory in Orthodoxy, only a "necessary evil" or "lesser of two evils" framework.

    2. The Challenge of Nationalism (Phyletism)
    A significant portion of the book tackles Phyletism—the idea that the Church should be subordinated to the interests of a specific ethnic or national group.

    The text references the Council of Constantinople (1872), which officially condemned phyletism as a heresy.

    The editors include documents showing how the "symphonia" (the ideal harmony between Church and State) has often been abused to justify expansionist wars or ethnic cleansing, particularly in the context of the Balkans and post-Soviet Eastern Europe.

    3. Modern Church Statements
    The resource book acts as an archive for modern institutional stances. It includes:

    The Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church (2000): A nuanced document that discusses the duty to defend the homeland while maintaining the moral high ground.

    Ecumenical Patriarchate Documents: Statements from Patriarch Bartholomew, often called the "Green Patriarch," linking peace with environmental justice and human rights.

    4. Models of Peace and Martyrdom
    The book profiles modern saints and witnesses who embodied non-violence. Notable examples include:

    St. Maria Skobtsova: A nun who died in Ravensbrück for hiding Jews during the Holocaust.

    The Holy Martyrs Boris and Gleb: "Passion-bearers" who refused to take up arms against their brother in a power struggle, choosing death over fratricide.

    Part 2: Critical Review
    The Strengths
    1. Eschewing Legalism: Unlike Western Christian traditions that rely on the "Just War" criteria (proportionality, last resort, etc.), this book emphasizes repentance (metanoia). It successfully argues that even a "defensive" war leaves a stain on the soul. This refusal to "sanctify" killing is the book's strongest theological contribution.

    2. Practical Pluralism: Forest and Bos do not shy away from the diversity of thought within Orthodoxy. They include voices that are strictly pacifist alongside those who recognize the duty of the soldier. This makes the book a "resource" rather than a "manifesto."

    3. Timeliness: In the wake of current conflicts (such as the war in Ukraine and tensions in the Middle East), the book’s critique of "Holy War" rhetoric is prophetic. It challenges the "sacralization" of the state, reminding the reader that the Kingdom of Heaven has no earthly borders.

    The Weaknesses
    1. Structural Density: Because it is a compilation of primary sources and essays, the reading experience can feel fragmented. It is not a book one reads cover-to-cover easily; it is better used as a reference for students or clergy preparing sermons and lectures.

    2. The Gap Between Doctrine and Practice: The book highlights a painful irony: while the texts and canons are profoundly peaceful, the history of Orthodox nations is often blood-soaked. The editors acknowledge this, but some readers might want more "boots-on-the-ground" analysis of why the Church leadership often fails to check the aggression of the State.

    Conclusion: A Call to "Askesis"
    For the Peace from Above ultimately argues that peace is a form of askesis (spiritual discipline). It is not something achieved through treaties alone, but through the transformation of the human heart. By collecting these diverse voices, Forest and Bos provide a roadmap for an Orthodox "theology of peace" that is deeply rooted in the past but urgently relevant to the present.

    It is an essential volume for anyone trying to understand why the Orthodox Church prays for peace in every service, yet struggles with the weight of national identity in a fallen world.

    Would you like me to provide a list of the specific Patristic canons mentioned in the book regarding soldiers and communion?
    ===

    Posted by at

    2025/12/16

    What to do about Confucianism - The Korea Times

    What to do about Confucianism - The Korea Times


    What to do about Confucianism

    By Mark Peterson
    @contributor@koreatimes.co.kr
    Published Sep 14, 2025 3:30 pm KST


    I was recently asked to give the keynote speech at a festival sponsored by the Institute of Korean Confucian Culture. It was a three-day event celebrating traditional culture in Korea with an emphasis on “K-yugyo,” or K-Confucianism, to fit into the Korean wave. As I have been watching the changes in Korean views of Confucianism, here is what I said:

    I’ve been concerned about the changing image of Confucianism in Korea today. Attitudes about Confucian practices like ancestral rites are changing, and society in general has developed attitudes about Korean Confucianism that are based on misinformation and misunderstandings.

    Confucianism is one of the great philosophies of the world. The values of Confucianism teach young people how to become responsible members of society. The values of respect for elders and humility are found in the idea of "hyo," or respect for one’s parents. Patriotism and love of one’s country is found in the values of "jeong," or loyalty.


    “In, eui, ye, ji"— these values guide society. "In" — benevolence, or treating others as you would like to be treated, is a core value found in every religion in the world.

    “Eui" means justice. Justice is based on law, and in today’s world laws are created in democratic assemblies, by representatives elected by the people. Without justice there is chaos. Justice operates on a national level with laws that protect all people fairly and equally, and on a personal level in governing an individual’s actions in society.

    “'Ye" means both formal ceremony and personal behavior. Through formal ceremony we show our allegiance to the ideals of the group — the nation, the family, the school, the business. Formal ceremonies exist for all these groups. And "ye" also governs personal behavior — to show respect for others. This can be seen in things as simple as lining up to ride the bus, allowing another to go through the doorway first, greeting one another at the start of the day or when first meeting and saying farewell in a respectful way when parting.

    “Ji,” or wisdom, has great meaning in Korea. Korea has one of the highest levels of education and educational standards in the world. Indeed, with Korea’s tradition of woodblock printing beginning a thousand years ago, and an educational system across the country that prepared young scholars to take the state exams, thereby creating a centralized government that replaced primitive feudalism, Korea developed a culture and civilization long before its neighboring countries.

    One problem is that many in Korea misunderstand the difference between Confucianism and patrilineality, or male domination. Originally in Korea, men and women were treated equally. Politics was always the realm of the men, but in society in general, women had access to property, they inherited property on an equal footing with their brothers.


    The fact that Korean women today still retain their natal surname is a remnant of the time when women were treated equally.

    The problem was created in the late 17th century when Korea abandoned equal treatment of women and bilateral kinship practices and rather adopted primogeniture and patrilineal kinship. With it came negative ideas that we have rejected in society today, such outdated phrases and ideas like “male superiority, female inferiority” and “men first, women second,” or married women no longer being a part of her family lineage, the idea of separating genders after age 7 —     all these practices are from the late Joseon period, and a distortion of Confucianism.

    In rejecting patrilineage, we should be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater — don’t reject Confucianism alongside its negative byproducts.

    To reject distorted Confucianism, to reject ideas of male dominance, to reject patrilineage is to return to the original Confucianism. Korea practiced egalitarian Confucianism prior to the late 17th century for a thousand years. Korea needs to return to the pure, undistorted Confucianism of early Korea — that Confucianism of noble moral values is what is needed in Korea today.

    Korea today has some tendencies of selfishness, one self above others — this is not the Confucian way. Evidence of this can be seen in the lowest birthrate in the world. This practice, if continued, will destroy the country. This low birthrate is based in selfish and materialistic motivation. It not only will destroy the nation, but individual people as well.

    Confucianism means family. Confucianism stands for family, and children, and nonmaterialism. Confucianism stands for large families — four or five children instead of a Mercedes-Benz or an Audi or a Lexus. Confucianism stands for love of family, love of children and love of grandchildren. Confucianism needs to form the basis for a new set of values in Korea. A set of values based on family, not automobiles — a set of values based on “hyo” and children, not on what school you went to and how much money you make.

    The antimaterialist maxim of Confucianism that said one should live modestly, together with a pro-family agenda, will save this country. Confucianism, in cooperation with other systems of belief, is the key to saving a country heading for destruction. Confucianism should be the salvation of Korea."




    Mark Peterson (frogoutsidethewell@gmail.com) is a Professor Emeritus of Korean Studies at Brigham Young University in Utah. The views expressed here are his own.


    ==
    Vladimir Tikhonov


    ·
    I am a bit afraid about using the value-ladden terms, like 'distortion', in a historical context. Won't it be more precise to talk about preferred interpretations in different historical epochs? There are too many ways to interpret Confucianism - and the same holds for, say, Christianity - and who I am to say which one was 'genuine' and which was 'distorted'? And, just to be frank - the pre-Qin Confucianism, if we take it as a 'genuine' one, was no gender equality paradise either. Sorry, but THIS is the original Confucianism: 子曰：「唯女子與小人為難養也，近之則不孫，遠之則怨。」《論語·陽貨》 (“Women and servants are hard to handle. If you are familiar with them, they lose their humility; if you keep them at a distance, they become resentful.”,Analects 17.25). Confucius was an aristocrat in a patriarchal society - and, as such, he DID expect obedience from supposedly 'lesser' beings around. And all that has little to do with our social reality today. To be frank, I do not think it is helpful at all for sorting out the issues of late capitalist crisis.


    ===
    Posted by at
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)