Can War Ever Be “Just”? – Part 2 – Greg Albrecht

In Part One we provided an overview of Christ-centered teaching about violence and war [click here to read part 1] and now we continue with:

Part Two: Can War Ever Be “Just”?

“Just” War

The issue of what Christians thought and how they responded to warfare changed dramatically when the Roman Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in 313, legalizing Christianity within the empire, an empire that glamorized, lionized and economically depended on warfare, as a means of gaining and preserving its power. At this point it seems Constantine conveniently decided that warriors of a Christian nation are fighting not only for their country but for God. Conflating the national desires of a country with the will and approval of God served the purposes of Rome well, and has resonated with nations within Christendom since that time.  

In the wake of Constantine’s death and the far-reaching implications of his edicts Augustine of Hippo (354-430) is credited as one of the first Christian thinkers/theologians who tackled the topic of warfare and the conditions in which war might be considered morally justifiable. Augustine proposed that war can be “just” if the reasons behind war carry sufficient moral weight. He wrote, “Love does not preclude a benevolent severity.”  

This one statement summarizes a central tenant of just war and is a clear distinction between the teachings of Jesus about loving one’s enemy, putting away the sword and turning the other cheek. In the 13^th century Thomas Aquinas refined some of the principles Augustine suggested as justifications for war so that just war has been officially embedded within Christendom for some 1600 years.

Moral justifications for going to war, summarized as just war include: 1) war can only be declared by the state, not by individuals, 2) war must be waged for a legitimate moral purpose, 3) war must intend to replace evil with good (or better), and 4) deadly force can only be directed at combatants, not civilians, 5) war is a last resort, and 6) while war is always evil, in a just war good will eventually prevail over evil. These general principles have been accepted and held sway in popular opinion for many centuries in countries of the West, most of which were/are at least culturally Christian.  

Today we hear some proposing inevitable warfare must be fair and equal.  No serious attempt has even been undertaken to restrict a just war to any definition of fairness or equality, for war is anything but fair and equal. Warfare by definition is never fair and equal. 

Some have proposed that answering the morally difficult question of war should include making a distinction between fact and opinion, such as: 1) it is a fact that war is inevitable and it is a fact to say that innocent people always die in war (innocent in terms of being a non-combatant).  2) However, it is an opinion that war is always wrong and therefore the topic is open to discussion. 

“Just war” advocates suggest that justice in war means putting right a wrong. In addition, a just war may be warfare to prevent wrongs from been perpetrated or from continuing. Defending the innocent is often regarded as a just cause for a just war and thus a “just war” is more often seen as a response rather than an unprovoked attack.  

Some just war advocates believe that “might makes right” and therefore encourage their nation to be militarily strong to discourage other nations from waging war. But this is a huge assumption, illogical and lacking any historical support, for many of the most horrific wars have been waged by superior military powers. 

Augustine said there are three “just causes” for war:  1) defending against attack, 2) recapturing property and resources and saving lives of victims and hostages, and 3) punishing nations and leaders who have waged an unjust war. 

Thus, a just war can be just because it is the last resort to prevent the triumph of evil (as defined by the responding nation). War, so say many, is necessary and inevitable because there are always humans and groups of humans who will stop at nothing unless and until they are stopped. By definition, a just war is the justifiable last resort to stop great(er) suffering. 

War is Always Wrong – It is Never Just

Given what seem to be Christ-centered logic and biblical support, some Christ followers see just war as a defensible perspective, while other Christ followers believe in non-violent pacifism, which for them seems in keeping with Jesus’ teachings. Some of the arguments that propose war to always be wrong include:

• War is never moral. War always involves some level of revenge. Humans are incapable of being just when initiating or responding to the evil of war.
• War is a perfect example of the survival of the fittest – war is the law of the jungle. War means the strong do whatever they want, either through war or intimidation, while the weak must find ways to hide and survive. 
• War is never governed by spiritual and moral values. War is about national interests, about lust, greed, avarice and hatred. War is taking something – property, possessions, resources, happiness, peace and life itself from others. War is hell. Everyone loses, no one wins. 
• The nuclear age of warfare, with nuclear bombs, not to mention chemical and biological warfare, renders all just warfare propositions pointless. There are no values involved in annihilation and mass destruction.
• Nations and people groups pronounce horrific injustices from which they suffer as “days of infamy” yet those days they define are often just another chapter in a long struggle of violence being returned for violence once inflicted. War is evil because it is an unending death dealing cycle of revenge perpetrated as an “eye for an eye.” 

---

WATCH FOR PART THREE OF THIS SERIES – CAN WAR EVER BE “JUST”? 

If you have found this article helpful, please consider subscribing (free). And if you’d like to help us help others, please consider sharing it with others and hitting the “GIVING” button at the top of the page.

---