Do Church leaders believe that the “Just War Theory” is Jesus will?

[Steven_Merten]

fix:

Not for me. I accept what Mother Church teaches. We may disagree with a prudential judgment of a Pope, but can you cite where the Church has said all of modern warefare is unjust? I agree that intentionall killing civilians is unjust. The USA has been guilty of this in the past. That does not mean every action of the modern military is unjust or Christ does not approve.

Hello Fix,

I agree with you.

About ten or twelve years ago there were two people killed by Vatican Guards. These two kills were classified as murders. Seems a Vatican guard’s wife brought her new boyfriend to meet her husband and the Vatican guard husband killed them at the Vatican. This makes 100% of all JPII erra Vatican police kills, (that I have heard of), murders. Had Vatican Police been removed from the Vatican prior, these two Church kills would not have happened. Still I think the value of the protection of the Pope, Vatican treasures and millions of pilgrims per year is worth the risk of a couple of murders from having armed Vatican Guards.

I think that using force (violence as some call all kills) to protect the Vatican, even with the incapability of the Church to insure that the innocent will not be killed by Vatican Guards, is still Jesus will. It is a “greater good” to protect the Vatican from complete chaos and certian total destruction than to try to insure zero innocent individuals will be killed by Vatican Guards by removing Vatican Guards.

Fifteen hundred years or so of Church actions alone send a loud message as to how Church leaders envision Christ’s will on the use of deadly force to protect themselves and others.

Though many French civilians were killed by Allied fire power in WWII, the French were exstatic over the tremendous gift from the Allies of liberation from German oppression. When madmen are intentionally genociding your families, you do not worry about unintentional kills by your rescuers.

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[fix]

Steven Merten:

Hello Fix,

I agree with you.

About ten or twelve years ago there were two people killed by Vatican Guards. These two kills were classified as murders. Seems a Vatican guard’s wife brought her new boyfriend to meet her husband and the Vatican guard husband killed them at the Vatican. This makes 100% of all JPII erra Vatican police kills, (that I have heard of), murders. Had Vatican Police been removed from the Vatican prior, these two Church kills would not have happened. Still I think the value of the protection of the Pope, Vatican treasures and millions of pilgrims per year is worth the risk of a couple of murders from having armed Vatican Guards.

I think that using force (violence as some call all kills) to protect the Vatican, even with the incapability of the Church to insure that the innocent will not be killed by Vatican Guards, is still Jesus will. It is a “greater good” to protect the Vatican from complete chaos and certian total destruction than to try to insure zero innocent individuals will be killed by Vatican Guards by removing Vatican Guards.

Fifteen hundred years or so of Church actions alone send a loud message as to how Church leaders envision Christ’s will on the use of deadly force to protect themselves and others.

Though many French civilians were killed by Allied fire power in WWII, the French were exstatic over the tremendous gift from the allies of liberation from German oppression. When madmen are intentionally genociding your families, you do not worry about unintentional kills by your rescuers.

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com]

Hi Steve,

I mentioned in a previous post that I would like to know how pacifism is defined. If one means total non violence under any circumstance, then a nation or individual responsible for a family cannot be a pacifist. Perhaps an indiviual with no responsibility could be a pacifist and it would be morally licit, but other than that I can’t see how it would be acceptable.

 

[Steven_Merten]

fix:

Steven Merten:

Hi Steve,

I mentioned in a previous post that I would like to know how pacifism is defined. If one means total non violence under any circumstance, then a nation or individual responsible for a family cannot be a pacifist. Perhaps an indiviual with no responsibility could be a pacifist and it would be morally licit, but other than that I can’t see how it would be acceptable.

Hello Fix,

I have often wondered about a senario where Jesus mother Mary was put in danger. What would Jesus will His Apostles to do? If the Twelve Apostles put their hands upon their swords and stated to Jesus, “give us your command”, what would Jesus’ answer be? If Jesus said, “you have a right to protect my mother” would not the Apostles say, “Our rights mean nothing to us. We obey your command. Give us your command to either draw our swords and protect your mother or sheath our weapons and pacivly stand by idle while your mother is harmed. What is your will Lord?”

If Jesus were to will the Apostles to draw their swords to protect His mother, could He still be classified by the pacifists as a pasifist. If Jesus were to command His Apostles to sheath their weapons and stand by idle while Jesus own mother was harmed, how could anyone, including Church leaders ever do anything else but non violence to protect themselves out of respect for Christ’s will toward the protection of His own mother Mary.

What are your thoughts to such a senario?

When Jesus transfered the responsibility of His mother over to Disciple John at His crucifixion, did John know how to deal with those who might try to physically harm her? One way or the other I am sure he clearly knew Christ’s will to such an important question.

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[fix]

Steven Merten:

Hello Fix,

I have often wondered about a senario where Jesus mother Mary was put in danger. What would Jesus will His Apostles to do? If the Twelve Apostles put their hands upon their swords and stated to Jesus, “give us your command”, what would Jesus’ answer be? If Jesus said, “you have a right to protect my mother” would not the Apostles say, “Our rights mean nothing to us. We obey your command. Give us your command to either draw our swords and protect your mother or sheath our weapons and pacivly stand by idle while your mother is harmed. What is your will Lord?”

If Jesus were to will the Apostles to draw their swords to protect His mother, could He still be classified by the pacifists as a pasifist. If Jesus were to command His Apostles to sheath their weapons and stand by idle while Jesus own mother was harmed, how could anyone, including Church leaders ever do anything else but non violence to protect themselves out of respect for Christ’s will toward the protection of His own mother Mary.

What are your thoughts to such a senario?

When Jesus transfered the responsibility of His mother over to Disciple John at His crucifixion, did John know how to deal with those who might try to physically harm her? One way or the other I am sure he clearly knew Christ’s will to such an important question.

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com]

My beliefs are based on Church teaching. I have seen no proof the Church asks us to be pacifist. I am sure Christ would not want us to stand by while our mother was raped or killed. Would Christ want your 5 year old daughter killed or defiled in the name of pacifism. I am no scholar, but i have read enough to know that the Church does not endorse pacifism as some preferred way to lead our life. She tells us that we have an abosulte right to defend ourselves from an unjust aggressor.

I have read lives of the saints and other holy stories that would indicated force is just and reasonable to protect others and self. Mother Angelica tells the story of a man in the 20th century who was protected by St. Joseph. The story goes he was on a train and was about to be attacked and killed when a fist appeared out of nowhere and struck the attacker and sent him reeling. The fist belonged to St. Joseph, protector of the family. Amen!

 

[Steven_Merten]

fix:

My beliefs are based on Church teaching. I have seen no proof the Church asks us to be pacifist. I am sure Christ would not want us to stand by while our mother was raped or killed. Would Christ want your 5 year old daughter killed or defiled in the name of pacifism. I am no scholar, but i have read enough to know that the Church does not endorse pacifism as some preferred way to lead our life. She tells us that we have an abosulte right to defend ourselves from an unjust aggressor.

I have read lives of the saints and other holy stories that would indicated force is just and reasonable to protect others and self. Mother Angelica tells the story of a man in the 20th century who was protected by St. Joseph. The story goes he was on a train and was about to be attacked and killed when a fist appeared out of nowhere and struck the attacker and sent him reeling. The fist belonged to St. Joseph, protector of the family. Amen!

Hello Fix,

I wish I could be so sure that modern day Church leaders make it so absolutly clear on how we are to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus when the time comes to kill to protect the innocent. I believe that the vast majority of Church leaders are far more interested in making their personal politcal views on individual wars known than teaching young Catholics how to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus whe the time comes to kill to protect the innocent.

I grew up in the UN Vietnam War erra. I spent decades, even going to Mass weekly, in confusion trying to deciefer Jesus will on when to kill if drafted into any war or even Jesus’ will on a basic police kill to protect the innocent.

Even when the Muslims were suffering genocide, rape and torture in Kosovo, Pope John Paul II opposed NATO force to protect them. Without explaining just when Jesus does will us to kill to protect the innocent, political condemnation of all wars by Church leaders can confuse those who must fight, kill and die to protect the innocent according to the will of Jesus.

Do you think that modern day Church leaders have made Christ’s will absolutly clear to anyone facing the decision on whether or not to kill to protect the innocent? What is more important, teaching young Catholics how to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus when the time comes to kill to protect the innocent or making sure the world knows the worldly political views of Church leaders?

Wars can only take physical life. Defiance to the will of Jesus can take a person’s eternal life. One soul going to heaven will out live the combine loss of physical years of life from all the wars in human history. I believe that people need to be clearly taught how to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus when the time comes to kill to protect the innocent. Teaching individuals how to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus should take priority in any Church leader action.

What do you think?

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[fix]

Steven Merten:

Hello Fix,

I wish I could be so sure that modern day Church leaders make it so absolutly clear on how we are to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus when the time comes to kill to protect the innocent. I believe that the vast majority of Church leaders are far more interested in making their personal politcal views on individual wars known than teaching young Catholics how to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus whe the time comes to kill to protect the innocent.

I grew up in the UN Vietnam War erra. I spent decades, even going to Mass weekly, in confusion trying to deciefer Jesus will on when to kill if drafted into any war or even Jesus’ will on a basic police kill to protect the innocent.

Even when the Muslims were suffering genocide, rape and torture in Kosovo, Pope John Paul II opposed NATO force to protect them. Without explaining just when Jesus does will us to kill to protect the innocent, political condemnation of all wars by Church leaders can confuse those who must fight, kill and die to protect the innocent according to the will of Jesus.

Do you think that modern day Church leaders have made Christ’s will absolutly clear to anyone facing the decision on whether or not to kill to protect the innocent? What is more important, teaching young Catholics how to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus when the time comes to kill to protect the innocent or making sure the world knows the worldly political views of Church leaders?

Wars can only take physical life. Defiance to the will of Jesus can take a person’s eternal life. One soul going to heaven will out live the combine loss of physical years of life from all the wars in human history. I believe that people need to be clearly taught how to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus when the time comes to kill to protect the innocent. Teaching individuals how to remain faithful and obedient to Jesus should take priority in any Church leader action.

What do you think?

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com]

You points are well taken. I have just a few thoughts. in the mid 1980s I seem to remember that JPII said he would lay down the crown of St.Peter and take up arms agaisnt Russia if She continued the crackdown on Poland.

Popes have allowed crusades. They were just wars. We have the just war theory. Certainly endorsed by the Church. Today, we have traitors to the faith even at the highest levels. It is hard to discern the truth at times. I mean we have prudential desicions that should be respected, but are not binding on our consciences. We have high ranking Church officials who have allegiences to others, beside Christ. It is a mess.

I stick with the truth. No one has provided me with an authoritative magisterial document cite that says we are to be pacifists.

 

[RBushlow]

francisca:

Well, maybe you are right… war for “just” reasons, yet, even if it is for “just” reasons, there always be some victims fall unjustly even for the “just-war”… so all in all, no war is “just”.

The doctrine of Just War does not require that no innocents be harmed, it requires an effort to avoid harming innocent non combatants.

 

[Steven_Merten]

fix:

You points are well taken. I have just a few thoughts. in the mid 1980s I seem to remember that JPII said he would lay down the crown of St.Peter and take up arms agaisnt Russia if She continued the crackdown on Poland.

If you can find such a statment in print, I would be interested in reading it. Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[athair_siochain]

The doctrine of Just War does not require that no innocents be harmed, it requires an effort to avoid harming innocent non combatants.

Christs last words were. “Forgive them father they know not what they do,”
Think about this ,

If we all take a eye for a eye we will all become blind. the doctrine of a just war is to legalize murder. no different than abortion. If Christ believed in a Just War he would have had help from his father, to vaporize those he disliked, I am sorry but I see just wars as a excuse to commit murder, and those who support just wars are insane, most wars are waged because of blind greed, and you will find landlords and moneylenders are to the fore in the war starting, having said that , Christ did demonstrate his dislike for landlords and money lenders so why have they not been banned from entering the house of God, maybe it is because the House of God is owned by a landlord who collects rent to pay back a loan to a moneylender.

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

youtube.com/watch?v=DgRVNjsuycQ

 

[Ender]

If we all take a eye for a eye we will all become blind. the doctrine of a just war is to legalize murder. no different than abortion.

This is a direct contradiction of what the Church teaches so your claim amounts to charging that the Church is complicit in murder.

*Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. … While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. *(Cardinal Ratzinger, 2004)

I am sorry but I see just wars as a excuse to commit murder, and those who support just wars are insane

Once again, this is a charge levied against the Church. If you are right then there is no reason to be a Catholic and every reason to reject an organization that is “insane”.

Ender

 

[athair_siochain]

This is a direct contradiction of what the Church teaches so your claim amounts to charging that the Church is complicit in murder.

*Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. … *While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. (Cardinal Ratzinger, 2004)

Once again, this is a charge levied against the Church. If you are right then there is no reason to be a Catholic and every reason to reject an organization that is “insane”.

Ender

This is not against the church. as the church belongs to Christ.

Thou shall not Kill, is a command from God. – cannot be accommodated in any way, Christ last words ." forgive them father they know not what they do" was a message to all mankind not just the people who put Christ on Trial ,