Would it be a sin to fight in a war that goes against Catholicism's Just War belief?

[PMV]

If you were in the army and sent to fight a war, would it be a sin for you to fight in the war if it goes against Catholicism’s Just War Doctorine? After all, you did sign up for the army and “must” follow your seargent’s rules.

 

[Della]

War. You tell us what you think.

 

[HagiaSophia]

PMV:

If you were in the army and sent to fight a war, would it be a sin for you to fight in the war if it goes against Catholicism’s Just War Doctorine? After all, you did sign up for the army and “must” follow your seargent’s rules.

I believe the decision as to just or unjust war lies with the secular leaders of the nation.

 

[patricius]

Yeah, but…

if your sergeant told you, arbitrarily, to jump off a bridge, would you do it? I mean, conscience still has to have some role to play, doesn’t it? Is “I was just following orders” a completely bulletproof moral excuse?

My answer would be-- it depends on how certain the soldier is of the unjust nature of the war, and on how reasonable that certainty is. If you’re pretty darn sure that the war is wrong, I’d say you’ve got to lay down your arms. But the benefit of the doubt goes to your legitimate and hopefully well-informed civil leadership.

 

[mjdonnelly]

The need to go to war is determined by the leaders of the country, not the Vatican!

The Just War Doctrine sounds good but is not concrete in that there is leeway for decisions.

 

[Digitonomy]

patricius:

My answer would be-- it depends on how certain the soldier is of the unjust nature of the war, and on how reasonable that certainty is. If you’re pretty darn sure that the war is wrong, I’d say you’ve got to lay down your arms. But the benefit of the doubt goes to your legitimate and hopefully well-informed civil leadership.

Absolutely. You can’t just accept the decision of the secular leadership that it’s a just war to invade Poland to exterminate all the Jews there. Our responsibility to be informed and make decisions on that basis is deeper than that. But unless you’re quite confident that they’re wrong, you must give the benefit of the doubt to your superiors.

 

[katherine2]

HagiaSophia:

I believe the decision as to just or unjust war lies with the secular leaders of the nation.

what grace gives them this teaching authority?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

PMV:

If you were in the army and sent to fight a war, would it be a sin for you to fight in the war if it goes against Catholicism’s Just War Doctorine?

How would the soldier know that the war was unjust? Is it within his competence to make such a determination with moral certainty? I don’t think so.

I’m an officer in the USAF and we get orders to wage war without necessarily having access to the information necessary to answer the questions relevant to the Just War Theory. With perhaps one exception (deliberate targeting of non-combatants), it is virtually impossible for anyone other than the national command authorities to answer whether a war meets these principles or not. The best a soldier can do is ensure that he is acting in accord with the Law of Armed Conflict. The rest of the Just War principles presume a knowledge of national security information and matters pertaining to the strategic level of war that those operating at the operational and tactical level of war almost never have.

 

[patricius]

I agree.

 

[Joanna]

katherine2:

what grace gives them this teaching authority?

George Weigel, Papal biographer, author of “Witness to Hope” whose career studies focused on Catholic international relations theory, the just-war tradition and the pursuit of peace in its classic Catholic sense of “public order,” states:

"There is a charism of political discernment that is unique to the vocation of public service. That charism is not shared by bishops, stated clerks, rabbis, imams, or ecumenical and interreligious agencies. Moral clarity in a time of war demands moral seriousness from public officials. It also demands a measure of political modesty from religious leaders and public intellectuals, in the give–and–take of democratic deliberation. "

George Weigel, a Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C. , writes in an essay adapted from his lecture at the Catholic University of America Law School:

“From its beginnings in St. Augustine, just-war thinking has been based on the presumption – better, the classic moral judgment – that rightly-constituted public authorities have the moral duty to pursue justice – even at risk to themselves and those for whom they are responsible. That is why, for example, St. Thomas Aquinas discussed just war under the broader subject of the meaning of *‘charity’, *”

 

[Joanna]

itsjustdave1988:

How would the soldier know that the war was unjust? Is it within his competence to make such a determination with moral certainty? I don’t think so.

I’m an officer in the USAF and we get orders to wage war without necessarily having access to the information necessary to answer the questions relevant to the Just War Theory. With perhaps one exception (deliberate targeting of non-combatants), it is virtually impossible for anyone other than the national command authorities to answer whether a war meets these principles or not. The best a soldier can do is ensure that he is acting in accord with the Law of Armed Conflict. The rest of the Just War principles presume a knowledge of national security information and matters pertaining to the strategic level of war that those operating at the operational and tactical level of war almost never have.

I couldn’t agree more.

I quote George Weigel as I did elsewhere in this thread because he has the background knowledge necessary to speak seriously to this issue: firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0301/articles/weigel.html

"Finally, moral clarity in this time of war requires a developed understanding of the “location” of the just war tradition in our public discourse and in responsible governance.

If the just war tradition is indeed a tradition of statecraft, then the proper role of religious leaders and public intellectuals is to do everything possible to clarify the moral issues at stake in a time of war, while recognizing that what we might call the “charism of responsibility” lies elsewhere–with duly constituted public authorities, who are more fully informed about the relevant facts and who must bear the weight of responsible decision–making and governance. It is simply clericalism to suggest that religious leaders and public intellectuals “own” the just war tradition in a singular way.

… many of today’s religious leaders and public intellectuals have suffered severe amnesia about core components of the tradition, and can hardly be said to own it in any serious intellectual sense of ownership. But even if today’s religious leaders and public intellectuals were fully in possession of the tradition, the burden of decision–making would still lie elsewhere. Religious leaders and public intellectuals are called to nurture and develop the moral–philosophical riches of the just war tradition. The tradition itself, however, exists to serve statesmen."

zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=11136

 

[Joanna]

PMV:

If you were in the army and sent to fight a war, would it be a sin for you to fight in the war if it goes against Catholicism’s Just War Doctorine? After all, you did sign up for the army and “must” follow your seargent’s rules.

If you are a soldier be a soldier. Trying to be a statesman or moral theologian will serve your enemy more than our country or the soldier next to you.

The Just War Theory, as it applies to this new era of threat and warfare, and the depths of which our bishops have yet to plumb, needs study and development. It would be presumptuous and a deadly mistake for each individual of a fighting force to take this prerogative on himself.

 

[Prester_John]

patricius:

Yeah, but…

if your sergeant told you, arbitrarily, to jump off a bridge, would you do it? I mean, conscience still has to have some role to play, doesn’t it? Is “I was just following orders” a completely bulletproof moral excuse?

My answer would be-- it depends on how certain the soldier is of the unjust nature of the war, and on how reasonable that certainty is. If you’re pretty darn sure that the war is wrong, I’d say you’ve got to lay down your arms. But the benefit of the doubt goes to your legitimate and hopefully well-informed civil leadership.

Right on:thumbsup: !! If my country, for example, suddenly lost its marbles completely and ordered us to war against Israel, I would refuse, even if it meant open rebellion. Like my police officer and fire and ambulance counterparts, my job is to protect and serve my people, not allowing myself to be used arbitrarily to further the political ends of anti-semites, or for other reasons that would be immoral along those lines. Happily, my country has NOT taken total leave of its senses, and as a member of its military I am reasonably certain that my chain of command would take a dim view of any such attempt, should such occur in the future. I may not agree with the choices made by my nation’s politicians on my behalf, (especially in the context of the present war on terrorism), but in all the years I’ve served, I cannot say that I have ever been placed in a situation where I came into confilct between my orders, and my religious and moral convictions. Should it ever happen, a soldier’s duty is quite clear: he must not act on those orders, if he(she) maintains any serious doubt as to their moral correctness. This not disobedience; There was an incident I recall during the war in Bosnia, where three soldiers came under fire from two children, one 13 the other 14. The sgt gave the 2 men orders to shoot to kill, and they refused. The incident ended peacefully, and the 2 children were taken into custody. The two men were not charged with disobeying a direct order.They simply could not in good conscience kill 2 children, even though their lives were being threatened, and the order to kill was felt as immoral and unjustified, and the chain of command recognized this.So none of these men were punished.

 

[mlchance]

Joanna:

If you are a soldier be a soldier.

Part of being a soldier means faithfully defending the Constitution of the United States and following all lawful orders. If a soldier is convinced that an order is unlawful, he is honor-bound to not follow it, even if the consequences are less-than-desirable.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Joanna]

mlchance:

Part of being a soldier means faithfully defending the Constitution of the United States and following all lawful orders. If a soldier is convinced that an order is unlawful, he is honor-bound to not follow it, even if the consequences are less-than-desirable.

– Mark L. Chance.

That is true and reasonable but that is not the overall issue here of Just War theory. Your issue refers to a particular circumstance not the war in general which I believe is what we are discussing here.

 

[Benedictus]

The Church’s traditional teaching would say that if you are going to volunteer to fight in a war, then you need to be certain that the war is just. However, if you were conscripted into the military or are already a member of the military when you are ordered to go to war, then you are morally obligated to follow any orders given to you unless you are absolutely certain that they are immoral.

 

[JamesD]

katherine2:

what grace gives them this teaching authority?

I assume you mean authority of the decision and not teaching aurhority?
Do we not believe that God sets up those in power and takes them down by his own will?
“Give to Ceaser what is Ceasers”

My own grandfather was drafted into the German Army during WWI.

He did not see combat because God was with him and he sustained an injury in training that would not heal for some unexplainable reason. It did heal as soon as he was discharged and spent the war transporting wounded (of both sides) across the Alps. He told me that if he would have gone to combat I would never have been because the first person he would have shot was his commanding officer. He felt that the War and Germanys part was immoral and was willing to take the consequences of his disobedience. He felt that God saved him from this.

I guess I am saying that It is the Government that determines the need for War. But a person must discern very carefully if they feel that it is clearly unjust. They must listen to God before taking such a drastic step

.

 

[Apologia100]

katherine2:

what grace gives them this teaching authority?

The Catholic Church, as defined in the Just War Doctrine. The Church simply defines the attributes of a Just War, it is not in the business of declaring which war is just or unjust. Using this “is it a sin” business is just an excuse to use religion to opt-out of a duty you made an oath to uphold.

 

[Joanna]

PMV:

If you were in the army and sent to fight a war, would it be a sin for you to fight in the war if it goes against Catholicism’s Just War Doctorine? After all, you did sign up for the army and “must” follow your seargent’s rules.

I guess my problem with this premise is that “Catholicism’s Just War Doctine” was not developed by St. Augustine’s thought into tenets or rules to be applied ipso facto by sovereign states or individuals. It is rather a guide which has been developing and needs to continue to be understood as it applies to a changing world where threats and the means of making war evolve. It needs be a work in progress. It is a means of keeping morality central to the issues of war as a means of peace, the kind of peaceful order that allows life, liberty and freedom, especially religious freedom.

“Among true worshipers of God those wars are looked on as peacemaking which are waged neither from aggrandizement nor cruelty but with the object of securing peace, of repressing the evil and supporting the good.”– St. Thomas Aquinas.

 

[mlchance]

Joanna:

That is true and reasonable but that is not the overall issue here of Just War theory. Your issue refers to a particular circumstance not the war in general which I believe is what we are discussing here.

The same principle applies. A soldier must obey only lawful orders. An unjust war is not a war. An unjust law is not a law. If there were compelling reasons to believe a war unjust, a soldier could, in good conscience, refuse to fight in that war.

Whether or not the authorities recognize his good conscience is another question entirely.

– Mark L. Chance.