Just War and Our Wars: A Serial Reflection, part I
By Austin
Two stories lately have forced me to think about an issue Christians do not seem to be talking much about. Glenn Greenwald’s post over at Salon on the latest false claims by NATO concerning civilian deaths in Afghanistan, and Kathy Kattenburg on The Moderative Voice on Obama’s assassination program, telescopes the issues Christians face in support their government’s “War on Terror” (side note: it’s strange to have a war on a metaphor – but that’s for another post!).
So I’ve decided to do a series on comparing the classic criteria for a “Just War” with this war. Most Christians believe in “Just War” and so it’s very curious that there has been little reflection about our current wars in these terms. Perhaps they are just too long for us, and we’re fatigued. Perhaps the conflict is too complex, so we assume our government knows what it’s doing. Or, perhaps we think the menace, the terrorists, are somehow different, requiring new methods. Yet something terrible is going on in our world, and we are all a big part of it – for good or ill.
So, by way of introduction: Just war theory is the one of three basic positions Christians take on the issue of war. They are:
a. Pacifism: the position of the early church, rejecting war. This is based on passages such as Matthew 5 and Romans 12, against the use of evil to resist evil. Tertullian famously said that when Jesus told Peter to put away his sword on the night of his arrest, he sheathed all swords. Mostly Anabaptists take this position now.
b. Holy War: a position taken by the church under Constantine and Theodosius, and later in the Middle Ages. Modelled on someone like Joshua (although grossly misunderstanding this model), it led to the crusades and various other wars of Christian domination. This is not a real viable position for most denominations now, although it’s clear that a good portion of Christian functionally believe Holy War is appropriate.
c. Just War: this was developed once the Empire had become “Christianized” (although not Christian!), and Augustine was the first major Christian thinker to develop it. It began as a limiting idea during the Holy Wars the Christianized Empire engaged in. It was basically taken over whole-cloth by the Reformers, ending up as confessions in the Augsburg Confession (Lutheran), the Thirty-Nine Articles (Anglican), and the Westminster Confession (Reformed). If you asked a Christian on the street, they would say this is their position…
…except that most Christians have no idea what the position entails. There are six criteria, and this series will examine each criteria, and see whether or not our current wars fit.
Well said, although as an Anglican, pacifism is growing rapidly among Episcopalians and tends to be the view among contemporary Episcopalian theologians, although the church is still also firmly connected with the military as well. I would argue that while the issue of human sexuality is overtly dividing the church, issues of just war and pacifism are bringing about a stark diversity while not dividing.
Yes, I would say that more and more Christians – Congregationalists and others besides Episcopalians too – are starting to think about non-violence. In fact, in the 1930′s, it was the norm for liberal Christians. But as of yet, no demoninations except the traditionial pacificist have made this explicit. My hope is that this diveristy will be increased, and more discussion too!
[...] I began this series of reflections by laying out the ways Christians talk about war. Today I want to look at the first [...]
[...] second criteria is passed with flying colors – most likely. Continuing this series on Just War and Iraq and Afghanistan, we come to the third criteria. This states that those [...]
[...] far we’ve looked two criteria of Just War: good intention and legitimate authority. Now comes the real controversial part – just [...]