Justify war with the Gospel?

  • Thread starter Thread starter phantom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, if the Church says it is so, then it is so. But I don’t see it in His Gospel unless you consider when he tells us Moses gave us divorce because we were so unruly as a suggestion of why we see contridictions. Jesus told us He was our teacher and we are His students and every good student should strive to be like His teacher. He chose not to fight for the things of this world and I believe He did that because he placed more value in eternal life than in the things of this world. He knew there would be a resurrection and His followers at that time did not. I think He showed us what the BEST path was. Whether we are capable of accepting that same path is not as important as us admitting that it is the best path. We can never expect to fully accept the Truth if we don’t have the courage to admit what the Truth is.
Look at the passages I gave you earlier from the CCC. These flatly contradict your position.

When we ignore the Church’s official teachings in favor of our own interpretations of Scripture, we are in danger of puffing ourselves up as more morally alert than the Church.
 
Nope, not “buts.” The Church says that war can be just (indeed that war can even be obligatory), and she does so as a matter of doctrine.

– Mark L. Chance.
That was never my intention of the original post. I asked where IN THE GOSPEL IS WAR JUSTIFIED.
 
Look at the passages I gave you earlier from the CCC. These flatly contradict your position.

When we ignore the Church’s official teachings in favor of our own interpretations of Scripture, we are in danger of puffing ourselves up as more morally alert than the Church.
No, I do not disagree with the teachings of the Catholic Church and there is no danger in asking a serious question. Where in the Gospel is war justified? The just war doctrine does not appear in the Gospel. What you are trying to do is stifle thought in order to secure yourself. When I was young our parish priest died and we got a temporary pastor from a nearby monastary. He was a faithfull man. One Sunday he was giveing his homily and struggle to get out the words. He paused and then said: “When we become priests, we are young and full of faith. We are ready to die on the cross for the Gospel of Jesus. Then we are placed in a parish and we struggle with how we are going to get the Church’s monthly utility bill paid.” He was struggling with the complex task of living his faith, preaching the Gospel of Jesus and maitaining the institution of the Catholic Church. There are comprises that are made and they are difficult. Why do you believe that it is impossible for the just war doctrine to be a product of the institution of the Catholic Church and not be present in the Gospel of Jesus?
 
No, I do not disagree with the teachings of the Catholic Church and there is no danger in asking a serious question. Where in the Gospel is war justified? The just war doctrine does not appear in the Gospel. What you are trying to do is stifle thought in order to secure yourself. When I was young our parish priest died and we got a temporary pastor from a nearby monastary. He was a faithfull man. One Sunday he was giveing his homily and struggle to get out the words. He paused and then said: “When we become priests, we are young and full of faith. We are ready to die on the cross for the Gospel of Jesus. Then we are placed in a parish and we struggle with how we are going to get the Church’s monthly utility bill paid.” He was struggling with the complex task of living his faith, preaching the Gospel of Jesus and maitaining the institution of the Catholic Church. There are comprises that are made and they are difficult. Why do you believe that it is impossible for the just war doctrine to be a product of the institution of the Catholic Church and not be present in the Gospel of Jesus?
There are multiple places that I could cite but have already been cited. However, I think that you do not understand the nature of war. Without understanding the nature of war itself I can see how you will find trouble with this. A just was is so called because it is the fight for the good. However it is not a “tit for tat” struggle one power to the next. A war in the cause of justice is fundamentally Christian because it is the fight of good against evil itself become manifest in the flesh. For this reason spoke about how he did not come to unite but to divide. Jesus told us that there would be a time when family would be set against family because of Him. He also commanded those who did not have a sword to buy one. Yes, the better way is to avoid such conflict however that is not always possible in a world infected with Original Sin and the consequences thereof. So, for man to fight in a just cause is to take up the Banner of Christ at least in the heart and fight for what is good as He is good not for the love of the vain things of this world but rather for the good that is in the world which we are to reverence for the sake of He who labored over Creation.
 
The Pope does not disagree that there is something called a Just War. Neither did the Late Holy Father or any other before him. Such a claim is far from the truth.
Errr…No it’s not. Pope Benedict, in a recent interview said that it is doubtful that there is such a thing as a just war in the modern world. Want me to get a link for you?
 
His exacts words-

today we should be asking ourselves if it is still licit to admit the very existence of a "just war."

More from him on the subject-
“One cannot simply say that the catechism does not legitimize the war,” he continued. “But it is true that the catechism has developed a doctrine that, on one hand, does not exclude the fact that there are values and peoples that must be defended in some circumstances; on the other hand, it offers a very precise doctrine on the limits of these possibilities.”
Now don’t get me wrong (often happens here) I understand perfectly that it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor, and that that is the Churches position, but the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals. To pretend otherwise is wholly misleading, and certainly, Jesus doesn’t teach us to fight in the Gospel, he teaches us to LOVE.
 
Mark, I feel like we always end up having this conversation.

I think you are very wrong about your views on this subject. The Church has a just war doctrine because sometimes (rarely) war is inescapable. It is closely reasoned and part of an evolving theology. You can’t use it to justify war, the Church is against war. It’s obvious and emplicit in all it teaches. You have one tiny bit of doctrine and you cling to it with all your might!!
 
IThe Church has a just war doctrine because sometimes (rarely) war is inescapable. It is closely reasoned and part of an evolving theology. You can’t use it to justify war…
Wrong, that is precisely what the just war doctrine exists for, to determine whether or not a war is justified in accordance with Catholic doctrine. Church teaching very clearly contradicts you, so, to point this out again, if you disagree, it’s not with me, but with Holy Mother Church.
You have one tiny bit of doctrine and you cling to it with all your might!!
My goodness, what a silly accusation! A Catholic clinging to Catholic doctrine! Scandalous! For the record, I have all of the Church’s doctrines, and I do my best to cling to all of them, not just the ones that I find to my liking.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
Right-O Mark, if it makes you feel better to call me silly that’s fine. You keep banging your war drum.
 
However, I think that you do not understand the nature of war. Without understanding the nature of war itself I can see how you will find trouble with this. A just was is so called because it is the fight for the good. However it is not a “tit for tat” struggle one power to the next. A war in the cause of justice is fundamentally Christian because it is the fight of good against evil itself become manifest in the flesh.
For this reason spoke about how he did not come to unite but to divide. Jesus told us that there would be a time when family would be set against family because of Him. He also commanded those who did not have a sword to buy one. Yes, the better way is to avoid such conflict however that is not always possible in a world infected with Original Sin and the consequences thereof. So, for man to fight in a just cause is to take up the Banner of Christ at least in the heart and fight for what is good as He is good not for the love of the vain things of this world but rather for the good that is in the world which we are to reverence for the sake of He who labored over Creation.
Thank you for a very good response. I have not personally been through a war or fought in a war. My father did. I think there is a difference in our perception of war. I see war as chaos, where innocent men, women and children die and suffer on a routine basis because of the actions of the leaders of the countries involved. You apparantly see it as some type of clean theological event where the evil lose and the good win. It is not the soldier that has to answer the question of whether the war is just, it is the decision makers who wage the war. As citizens we are bound to be obedient to the leaders of our country if we are in military service. The soldiers are innocent victims as much as the civilians who are caught up in the battle. If you believe there is any good in war, then we do disagree on the very nature of war. War is evil. As for dividing us, the teachings of Jesus are capable of dividing us in many ways not just through a war.
 
Jesus gave us two commandments:1)Love God above all else. 2)Love our neighbor as ourself. If we love the world and its pleasures so much that we are willing to KILL our neighbors to preserve it for us are we guilty of the sin of idolatry?
If an innocent child were being attacked, would you come to the child’s defense, even if it meant using violence to defend him was necessary? If not, you could be committing a sin yourself, especially if you chose not to get involved, because of your own self interest.

Jesus teaching was not about being a pacifist in the face of injustice. Jesus himself used violence in the temple, when he drove out the money changer’s.

Nations have a right to defense, because without it, innocent people will be killed and enslaved.

The New Testament speak’s of personal responsibility in dealing with agressors, but without a closser look, it’s not so evident as to the responsibility of leaders of nations, to protect the innocent from agresssors.

However, St. Paul in the Epistiles, teach the early Christians who were serving in the Roman Army, to be just in their duties.
“He beareth not the sword in vain: for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil”; Romans 13:4, but he never tells them, that they must resign from military service.

Jesus teaching against retaliation, had nothing to do with nations defending or policing themselves against evil agression.

Peace
Jim
 
Wrong, that is precisely what the just war doctrine exists for, to determine whether or not a war is justified in accordance with Catholic doctrine. Church teaching very clearly contradicts you, so, to point this out again, if you disagree, it’s not with me, but with Holy Mother Church.

My goodness, what a silly accusation! A Catholic clinging to Catholic doctrine! Scandalous! For the record, I have all of the Church’s doctrines, and I do my best to cling to all of them, not just the ones that I find to my liking.

– Mark L. Chance.
If you have all the Church’s doctrines you must know that they have “evolved” quite alot through the centuries. The Gospel of Jesus has endured because it is pure truth, both philosophically and spiritually. To alter it would be to destroy it.
 
Jesus teaching was not about being a pacifist in the face of injustice. Jesus himself used violence in the temple, when he drove out the money changer’s.

“He beareth not the sword in vain: for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil”; Romans 13:4, but he never tells them, that they must resign from military service.

Jesus teaching against retaliation, had nothing to do with nations defending or policing themselves against evil agression.

Peace
Jim
I do not believe that Jesus was a pacifist, although I suspect that he was accused of being a pacifist and I believe that contributed to his being tortured and killed by his own leaders. He used violence to chase the money changers out of the temple, but he wouldn’t mount a revolution or assemble an army to establish a worldly Kingdom. Jesus always taught obedience to civil authority. He told us not to fear the man who could destroy your body, fear the man who would destroy your soul. So, telling soldiers to abandon service would not have fit with his Gospel. I accept the just war doctrine as a practical matter, but I believe it is very tenuous as far as it being backed up by the Gospel. The just war doctrine is about as weak an endorsement of war as can be written. This actually is a matter that has rather haunted me most of my life…why didn’t Jesus establish a kingdom here on earth…as so many of us who profess to be his followers try to do? He could have been an incredible leader for us. My only conclusion is that for him not to have died on that cross would have been a philosophical contradiction of his teachings. He was so free of idolatry and fear that he new that heavens reward far outweighed anything we have here. He knew about the resurrection and we didn’t, but now we do. He couldn’t tell us to turn the other cheek and then not do so himself. He couldn’t tell us to love our enemies and then waged war against them. I would rather believe you are right, but I just don’t see it.
 
Thank you for a very good response. I have not personally been through a war or fought in a war. My father did. I think there is a difference in our perception of war. I see war as chaos, where innocent men, women and children die and suffer on a routine basis because of the actions of the leaders of the countries involved. You apparantly see it as some type of clean theological event where the evil lose and the good win. It is not the soldier that has to answer the question of whether the war is just, it is the decision makers who wage the war. As citizens we are bound to be obedient to the leaders of our country if we are in military service. The soldiers are innocent victims as much as the civilians who are caught up in the battle. If you believe there is any good in war, then we do disagree on the very nature of war. War is evil. As for dividing us, the teachings of Jesus are capable of dividing us in many ways not just through a war.
As one who would have lead men into battle I am very keen on what war is and its ramifications. I understand deeply what it means to sacrifice for the sake of the whole. In fact a good friend of mine just came back from Afghanistan. He is an Officer of Marines and lost eight men under his command. However, even in this we see the good in war. War itself is never desired but when it happens it must be fought and it is indeed a struggle between good and evil. The soldier on the ground is not in any way an innocent victim of the national powers. Rather, he makes an oath to uphold the interests of his nation (in the US this also has an aspect of objection by conscious) and knows that he will one day be called to give his life for the sake of his nation. A willing participant cannot be a victim. Further, even if one is impressed into the military through a draft or conscription they still have that obligation to work for the war effort in so far as they are able in a just war. In a just war all citizens have a moral obligation to support it and to oppose it is in fact a sin.

Now, as to the good of war which I was about to address I can easily cite a single example - WWII which gives us a clear view of the good that comes from war. The good is winning the just fight against evil as personified in the Nazi Empire. War as a means to protect ones people and allies is a virtue, war to free oppressed people is a virtue - all these things are virtues. They are virtues because they are good in and of themselves. War is not fun and it does not have a pretty face but it is in the battle that war is waged against evil in the world when it cannot be contained through other means.

For this reason we speak about the spiritual battle. The analogy speaks to a truth that is found in its natural source. We are the Church Militant for a reason. Popes waged war for the sake of the Gospel and the defense of the Church in just manners. The moral principles do not change as they are timeless. They are as true then as they are today and will be in the future even until the time when Christ comes again with His army to smite evil.
 
Errr…No it’s not. Pope Benedict, in a recent interview said that it is doubtful that there is such a thing as a just war in the modern world. Want me to get a link for you?
His exacts words-

today we should be asking ourselves if it is still licit to admit the very existence of a "just war."

More from him on the subject-

Now don’t get me wrong (often happens here) I understand perfectly that it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor, and that that is the Churches position, but the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals. To pretend otherwise is wholly misleading, and certainly, Jesus doesn’t teach us to fight in the Gospel, he teaches us to LOVE.
To pose the question is not a denial of the same. Rather such moral principles need to be constantly reviewed for their validity.

Love is the impetus to fight a just war. The position that you advocate is contrary to the view of the Church when it took up this issue formally in the Early Church. Upon reflection it was determined that the command to love has within itself the command to fight even in combat if necessary for the sake of love. Hence to separate love and the defense of others is to distort love at its very foundation.
 
I agree that love is the most important part of Christian morality. But there are other good things too. Love and justice have to go together somehow, just as they do in God, who will divide men into the sheep and the goats at the end of the world, and of Jesus who both said love of God and of your fellow man are the two highest commandments, but who also is shown at the end of the world in this way: “Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems…”(Rev 19:11-12)
We ourselves should balance love and justice. Say a man robbed us–are we to refuse to cooperate with the police or the court if he is caught so that he will be stopped? While love is the most important commandment, how this is to be expressed often is channeled by other moral standards.
I gave you how I believe Jesus answered your questions in my post #22. Clearly Jesus fullfilled the law in his Gospel. He said He came so that the old law could be fullfilled. He said the old law was based on fear and sacrifice, but what he wants is love and mercy. So there was a kind of spiritual evolution from the old testament to Jesus’ Gospel. He discounted the “eye for an eye” philosphy and replaced it with love your enemies. His life was an act of love and mercy and his death was an act of love and mercy. He told us part of what Moses taught in the old testament was because we were so unruly. This is not my interpretation…this is what he said. I don’t think there is any heresy in it.
 
His exacts words-

today we should be asking ourselves if it is still licit to admit the very existence of a "just war."
If these are the Pope’s words, this is him asking whether we ought to consider re-thinking the existence of a just war. To say that this is the Pope denying that there is such a thing as a just war is a mischaracterization.
Now don’t get me wrong (often happens here) I understand perfectly that it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor, and that that is the Churches position, but the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals. To pretend otherwise is wholly misleading, and certainly, Jesus doesn’t teach us to fight in the Gospel, he teaches us to LOVE.
There are times when civilized means of solving conflicts break down, and we must resort to arms. How much love can we honestly say we have for the innocent when we let evil, violent people run roughshod over them?

I see an awful lot of people confusing love with misplaced compassion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top