A Just War?

A Just War?
by Rev. Hartshorn Murphy
At the time of this writing, our national politicians are engaged in a vigorous conversation about how to topple the government of another nation. The discussion has been largely one of military strategy and political timing and there is a sense of war's inevitability. Voices have been raised internationally - and a few nationally - that question the legality of such an action. Few indeed have questioned the morality of such a decision in this post 9-ll world in which "homeland security" seems to justify things once considered illegitimate. It would seem that we are taking a page from Israel's textbook on dealing with terrorism by "preemptive assassination" (premeditated murder by another name); the Bush administration plans to remove Saddam Hussein by preemptive war. The Christian Church has a gospel obligation to speak in a prophetic voice of dissent when it is intimated that this contemplated foreign aggression is, by conservative TV pundits, claimed to be a "just war."

Walter Wink, in his classic text Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination, examines the evolution of the theology of the "just war," which began with our patron, Augustine of Hippo (354-430). Prior to Augustine, the Christian Church universally rejected all war as immoral and abhorrent to God. Augustine, similarly to the other Church Fathers, argued that Christians had no right to defend themselves against violence but, in an era in which Christianity had become the State's dominant rather than illegal religion, Augustine speculated that Christians had a loving obligation to defend the innocent against evil. Augustine's articulation of "justified war" has dominated Christian thought on this issue for a millennium and a half, even though his reflection on this issue was grounded more in Stoic philosophical traditions than in Christian theology.

Wink argues that there are three kinds of war which claim to be "just" but which fail, in fact, to meet the rigorous theological criteria necessary to be so. They are: 1) The "Holy War" or "Crusade" which has no limits or ethical boundaries. Holy Wars are "total wars aimed at the utter subjugation or extermination of the enemy." (p. 212). Examples include the Hebrew conquest of Canaan, the Crusades, and World War I, 2) Political War or Wars of National Interest. Such wars are "interventions made by nations into the affairs of other nations for purely pragmatic and economic reasons." (p213) Examples include Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, Soviet aggression in Afghanistan, Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia, U.S. involvement in Vietnam, Grenada and Panama, 3) Wars of Machismo or Egocentricity are wars in which "a nation or its leader's pride or honor is so involved in not backing down, or standing up to an opponent, or in proving his or her courage, that all other considerations - including the loss of human life - are dwarfed by comparison." (pg. 213) Examples include Margaret Thatcher in the Falklands, Saddam Hussein's refusal to withdraw from Kuwait, George Bush's personalization of the Gulf War.

None of the wars listed as examples above meet the criteria of a Just War and interestingly enough, even World War II, widely regarded by the victors as just, was never examined by any church body before or during that conflict by the following criteria.

Criteria for a Just War: 1) The war must have a just cause, 2) It must be waged by a legitimate authority, 3) It must be formally declared 4) It must be fought with a peaceful intention, 5) It must be a last resort, 6) There must be a reasonable hope of success, 7) The means used must possess proportionality to the ends sought 8) Noncombatants must be given immunity, 9) Prisoners must be treated humanely, 10) International treaties and conventions must be honored.

Wink observes: "Most Christians assume that any war that they feel is just, or merely necessary and unavoidable, is just. The just war criteria, however, are extraordinarily demanding. They presuppose that no Christian should be involved in a war unless it meets all or at least most of the criteria. The burden of proof is always in those who resort to violence."

As Christian disciples, we are called to hold our leaders to a higher standard than political expedience, historical precedence, revenge or anticipatory counter-violence. War, as presently contemplated, is illegal under international law and, by failing to meet the majority of the just war criteria above, is immoral under Christian tradition.

Invoking the name of God to justify such action is blasphemy.

Perhaps the much larger question is this: during an age in which war inevitably involves weapons of mass destruction, ecological devastation and collateral damage (read: killing of the innocent), can modern war ever be "justified?" Put another way; is it not time to explore an alternative to war, namely, a radical commitment to non-violence coupled with a consistent implementation of policies which are motivated by human need rather than by human greed? It can be argued that when we seek justice, peace will follow.

Article Source: http://www.christiannotepad.com

Rev. David B. Smith
(the 'Fighting Father')
Parish priest, community worker,
martial arts master, pro boxer, author, father of three
www.fatherdave.org
Get a free preview copy of Dave's book,Sex, the Ring & the Eucharist when you sign up
for his free newsletterat www.fatherdave.org