Page 32

Update item information
Title Ends and means in conflict
Subject Nuclear warfare--Moral and ethical aspects; War--Moral and ethical aspects; War--Religious aspects; War and emergency powers--United States; Ends and means
Description The 49th Annual Frederick William Reynolds Lecture.
Creator Firmage, Edwin Brown
Publisher Division of Continuing Education, University of Utah
Date 1987-10-15
Date Digital 2008-05-29
Type Text
Format application/pdf
Digitization Specifications Original scanned on Epson Expression 10000XL flatbed scanner and saved as 400 ppi uncompressed tiff. Display images generated in PhotoshopCS and uploaded into CONTENTdm Aquisition Station.
Resource Identifier,1147
Source U263 .F57 1987
Language eng
Relation Digital reproduction of "Ends and means in conflict," J. Willard Marriott Library Special Collections
Rights Digital Image Copyright University of Utah
Metadata Cataloger Seungkeol Choe; Ken Rockwell
ARK ark:/87278/s6x34vfm
Setname uu_fwrl
Date Created 2008-07-29
Date Modified 2008-07-31
ID 320434
Reference URL

Page Metadata

Title Page 32
Description 32 EDWIN B. FIRMAGE them. All great spiritual leaders, however, have been storytellers. So remember the ending. After tares were planted amongst the wheat, one would expect the farmer carefully and quickly to find and obliterate the tares. Not so. He was directed to let them grow together. Like moral judgment in any other form, it was to be left to a later time and better perspective. With the Franciscan Richard Rohr, the tares of my earlier years I now see as my wheat. And surely the wheat of my youth I now see as the tares of my life. Truly, what stands between us and the Russians and the Chinese but fear? Love dissolves fear. The idea that we not resist evil, or the wicked, is among the most enigmatic and surely the most difficult teachings that spiritual teachers have ever given. Coupled with the related teaching of enemy love, these are the ultimate expressions of loving response to violence ever given. They are based, I believe, upon a profound psychological and spiritual insight into the effect upon us all if violence is met with violence. First and most obviously, such a response has no end short of obliteration of one or the other parties, or both. Violence precipitates violence until one party elects to absorb violence without similar response. Only then can the cycle end and peace be restored. Second and less obvious, even if the party responding to initial violence on the part of the other is able to respond with such power as to immobilize or destroy their original aggressor, the originally innocent "prevailing" party will suffer the effect of the dialectical relationship which exists between the end which was sought, the restoration of peace, and the means selected, violent response. For if we respond to violence with violence of our own, obviously we are repatterning our behavior upon the party doing violence to us. To that extent, the perpetrator of evil has already won. The violent means we selected to protect the end we desired, a condition of peace, have fundamentally affected that end. We have become violent and we are no longer at peace. Muscular non-violence at once preserves our integrity against cooperation with evil and at the same time allows us to avoid the trap of emulating the enemy as we oppose him. For if we adopt the enemy's means we have been defeated by absorption into his system. Then we have become the enemy in every sense.
Format application/pdf
Identifier 035-RNLT- firmageE_ Page 32.jpg
Source Original Manuscript: Ends and means in conflict by Edwin B. Firmage.
Setname uu_fwrl
Date Created 2008-07-29
Date Modified 2008-07-29
ID 320416
Reference URL