By GLEN BIEGEL
“Blessed are the peacemakers.” Few verses are quoted more often, and even fewer are as poorly understood. In public discourse, peace is often treated as the mere absence of conflict, quiet streets, polite words, agreements signed. But biblical peace, the peace Jesus blesses, is something far more demanding. Peace is not the absence of conflict alone; it is the absence of conflict in the presence of justice. Without justice, “peace” is simply silence enforced by power, fear, or forgetfulness.
This distinction matters because peacemaking operates at different levels, and confusion between them leads to moral collapse.
At the personal level, peacemaking is an act of love. It involves forgiveness, patience, restraint, and reconciliation. This form of peace is largely non‑destructive because it deals with hearts rather than regimes. It is the daily work of refusing retaliation, of loving one’s neighbor and enemy alike. When Jesus commands us to turn the other cheek, he is speaking into this personal domain, calling individuals to reflect God’s mercy rather than mirror the world’s violence.
There is also an eternal dimension to peacemaking. This is the peace that surpasses understanding, the peace that remains steady even when life does not. It is rooted not in circumstances but in hope, hope oriented toward heaven and grounded in trust that God’s justice will ultimately prevail. This peace does not depend on the resolution of every conflict here and now. It allows the believer to endure storms without surrendering to despair or hatred.
But it is the third level, societal peacemaking, where confusion is most dangerous.
Societal peace is not forged by goodwill alone, nor is it sustained by paper promises. History relentlessly teaches that peace between nations rarely follows declarations or treaties made in isolation. More often, it comes after violence has already exposed the true nature of injustice and forced one side to surrender its ability to continue harm. This is not a celebration of war; it is a sober recognition of human reality.
Jesus himself acknowledged this tension. He did not come to make peace with wrongdoing at the societal level. “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth,” he said. “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” This was not a call to violence, but a warning: truth divides. Justice disrupts false harmony. Societies built on violent oppression do not peacefully reform themselves because another country asks nicely.
Recent history offers painful clarity. In Iran, the mass killing of an estimated 30,000 innocent citizens sent an unmistakable message to those who believed peace could be secured through dialogue alone. Appeals made with pens were answered with executions. Whatever language one uses, whether massacre, atrocity, or crime against humanity, the conclusion is difficult to avoid: there was no peace to be had through treaties or words unbacked by accountability. Peace could only follow surrender, either surrender by oppressors, or surrender of the illusion that goodwill alone would restrain them.
This reality exposes a dangerous temptation among those who condemn all war without distinction. When we deny that words with dictators fail, we deny the human condition, the breadth of biblical history, and the modern reality of dictatorships. Scripture is unsparing in this regard. The Old Testament does not pretend that injustice dissolves when confronted with good intentions. The New Testament does not suggest that proclaiming peace absolves us from addressing suffering.
A regime that sponsors terror and authorizes the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people cannot be “made peaceful” through declarations alone. To insist otherwise is not moral idealism; it is abdication. It is to stand before the oppressed and say, “I leave you in despair, violence, and death, but peace be with you.”
St. James warned precisely against this posture. To encounter the hungry and the naked and respond only with words, “Be warm and well fed; go in peace”, is not loving, and saying to the Iranian hoping for a regime change as they are massacred, “Be comforted, I wish peace for you” is not peacemaking. It is a betrayal disguised as virtue. Words that do not confront injustice comfort only the powerful.
To bless the peacemakers, then, is not to bless passivity or denial. It is to bless those who love fiercely at the personal level, who cling to hope at the eternal level, and who refuse to mistake quiet for justice at the societal level. True peace is costly, and Iran’s may cost more than America wants to pay. Still, true peace demands clarity, courage, and, at times, confrontation. Anything less may look peaceful, but it leaves the world exactly as it is.
We don’t make peace with words. We make peace with strength, with weapons, and for the worst murders in the world, with war and surrender. Blessed are the Peace-Makers.
Glen Biegel is a technology security professional, Catholic father of nine, husband to a saint, and politically active conservative.
4 thoughts on “Glen Biegel: Blessed are the peacemakers. The war of words about Iran”
NEVER FORGET … ‘Ol Honey Bunny (aka: Daddy’s Little Princess) ain’t no peacemaker either!!!
By this measure, was Hitler making Peace when he invaded Poland and Czechoslovakia? After all, the re-drawn maps of Europe after WW I robbed Germany of plenty of territory. The manufactured nation of Czechoslovakia, the so-called Polish Corridor, East Prussia and the city-state of Danzig did not last. All were ripped out of Germany with little thought of the boundaries. Most historians agree that Germans who detested the Nazis knew darn well that Germany had been cheated by the Treaty of Versailles. Glenn is right when he says that “paper peace treaties” might not be very peaceful at all. But everyone knows that Hitler was guilty of aggression. Is this only a German characteristic?
However, MacArthur made REAL peace, and the Japanese came to respect him.
Yet few people believe that Trump has made war on Iran for the sake of helping persecuted Iranians. Most believe it is to support Israel. I am still asking, like Tucker Carlson, Thomas Massie, Rand Paul and MTG, “What’s in it for me, as an American, by constantly backing the Israeli State and risking WW III?”
Donald Trump is at war with himself. Remember this? “When I am re-elected, I am going to STOP wars, not make new ones.” How is annexing Canada and Greenland not aggression? Why weren’t they brought up in the presidential debates? I hate it when Lisa — IMPEACH TRUMP TWICE — Murky is on the right side of the issue. It’s always for the wrong reasons. But CONGRESS declares war, not presidents. A very, very bad habit since Harry Truman.
” blessed are the cheesemakers”
“We don’t make peace with words. We make peace with strength, with weapons, and for the worst murders in the world, with war and surrender. ” This is exactly the thinking of every civilization in the past, and I know the author acknowledges that. But if we can impose the peace of the personal level internationally, we may have a chance.