Round Table: Christian Warfare

Every month Conciliar Post offers a Round Table discussion, bringing together various Christian voices to reflect upon an important question or topic. Today’s Round Table considers the following question: Are Christians ever justified in supporting or advocating warfare, either on their own behalf or by the nation of which they are a part?

Represented in this Round Table are some fascinating perspectives, including that of a veteran of the United States Armed Forces and that of someone who was raised in the context of pacifism. We hope you find this discussion stimulating, especially in light of all the recent violence in our world.


Chris Casberg

Veteran’s Perspective


As a response to this question, I offer my experience as a Christian who played war from afar.

I joined the Marine Corps out of high school and served on active duty from 2005 to 2010. My job was 2671 Middle Eastern Cryptologic Linguist. Nevermind the officious phrasing; I was a translator. Specifically, my job was to translate foreign enemy communications for the National Security Agency. I supported real time and strategic missions in both military and counter-narcotics operations. I never deployed, but I’ve been a fly on the wall in places I could never see in the flesh. I’ve heard bored enemy radio operators tell very funny jokes, frustrated officers from opposing militaries complain about supplies, a child ask his father to come home—these things and more, all in a language other than my native tongue. I’ve also cheered a drone strike against men whose crime I did not know or even care to know, watched in amusement live footage of a man abducted from his fields, and nodded in approval at gruesome photos of bullet-ridden enemy fighters.

War is not terrible merely because it causes death, at least not in the eyes of the Christian. Death is not the worst thing to happen to man. Nor is it the last. A final and everlasting separation from God is the worst of all fates, and that cannot be caused by stray bullet or rocket. I cannot rob a man of his salvation by robbing him of his life. There is nothing made by human hands that can sever another’s bond with God. The man at war can truly endanger no soul except for his own, and therein lies the heart of the matter. War is terrible because it is a crucible of passions, where the best and worst parts of this broken race we call humanity blends in fire and smoke. Righteousness becomes an alloy mixed with bloodthirst, and in losing its purity loses its raison d’être entirely. Atrocities are committed by the heroes. The abuses at Abu Ghraib, the inhumane torture of our prisoners, and the murders by Marines in Haditha and U.S. Army soldiers in Kandahar province all speak to the monstrous sin that war enables.

That is not to say I am concerned only with conflict’s ravages of the warfighter’s soul. Far from it. Like ripples in a pond, the effects of war radiate outward and stretch far beyond the original point of impact. Families and communities are destroyed by incomprehensible suffering and loss. Towns are wiped out and the environment is poisoned. Worst of all is the horror experienced by the innocents caught in the crossfire. As an illustration, I had hoped  to share an article on the war in Syria I read several months ago. In the piece, the author interviewed a distraught Syrian man who returned to his bombed-out apartment in hopes of finding the missing leg of his young daughter, which doctors hoped to reattach. I could not find the article. There were just far too many stories of Syrian children who have lost limbs.

But another question: Could I ask the United States (and the Christians in her military) to sit idly by as a brutal extremist regime spreads its horrific reign of terror across the Middle East? I could not in good conscience do so. Worse than anything I have described is to watch your neighbor be swallowed by cruel and violent evil and offer nothing but words. Sometimes we must fight-but we must do with conduct befitting disciples of a loving God who died for all men, not just the ones who speak our own language.

Chris Casberg

Author at Conciliar Post


Laura Ehlen

Catholic Perspective


If we lived in a world of absolutisms, with no freedom of discernment and no moral gray area, the answer would be no, because war means killing, and killing breaks the Fifth Commandment.

However, the world which we inhabit is not a world of absolutisms. Our reality includes sins, free will, and moral gray areas—which means there is no absolute answer to this question. As Christians we cannot unequivocally answer no to this question, even if war does involve the taking of human life.

Scripture presents a complicated answer to the question of whether Christians should support or advocate war. In the Old Testament, particularly in the Pentateuch, God forbids murder while also leading Israel into war and blessing their efforts in wari.e. the killing of the chosen nation’s enemies. In the New Testament, while Jesus rebukes anger and murderin Matthew 26: 52 he warns that “all that take the sword shall perish with the sword”yet in Luke 3:14, when soldiers ask Jesus what they must do, he responds, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or false accusation, and be satisfied with your wages.” He does not command them to leave behind soldieringa life that involves warfare.

Scripture and tradition must accompany each other as we shape our consciences, so let us turn to one of the greatest moral theologiansSaint Thomas Aquinas. In the second part of the second part of the Summa Theologiae, question 40, he addresses the question of whether it is always sinful to wage war. He lists three requisites for a just war: the authority of a sovereign, a just cause, and the rightful intention of attaining peace.

A sovereignin Aquinas’ time a king, in our time a nationmust watch over the common weal of its people and protect them from both internal and external threats. In order to maintain civil peace and protect the lives of citizens, a nation sometimes must go to war. This first requirement also means that an individual inciting war for his own purposeslust for power, hate towards a particular nation, religion, or an ethnic group, etcis not justified. This war must also come from a just cause, such as if the nation has already been attacked, if an attack is most definitely impending, or if an uprising has shed the blood of the innocent. Finally, war must be a means to the greater end of peace. War must ultimately restore right order to the nations. If a nation enters war because it wishes to acquire territory, plunder the goods of a wealthy nation, or cruelly inflict suffering upon others, then the war is not just.

Aquinas wrote this with a different concept of warfare than ours. Yes, warfare involved violent killings, torture of prisoners, rapes, and pillagingall horrendous things. Warfare in the modern era includes all these things, but it has expanded into total warwhere cities are annihilated and thousands of civilians die with the force of a single bomb. Can total war still be just? Most moral theologians argue no, since it removes any and all moral limitations in warfarepeace cannot be attained when no one is left to live peacefully.

To return to my introductory point, there is no such thing as absolutisms on the moral issue of war. There can be no blanket statement for whether Christians can support, advocate, or participate in war, because each war entered under different circumstances with different intentions and different proportionalities. A great difference exists between wars such as the American Civil War and the Iraq Wardifferences that our consciences must be able to discern.

Laura Ehlen

Senior Editor at Conciliar Post


Lila Fair

Evangelical Perspective


I have always lived with the seeming oxymoron of the “Christian Soldier.”  My mother is descended from a long line of pacifist Quakers, yet my grandfather spent over a dozen years serving in the U. S. Navy, in peace and in war, and was buried with military honors.  My father was drafted and sent to Korea, yet our family rejoiced when my older brother was not required to serve in Vietnam.  When I was a child, one of our ministers was a conscientious objector during the Vietnam conflict; his successor was a decorated veteran of the same conflict.  Both were men of God.  Weren’t they?  How could they both be right?

I’m not a theologian, but a former librarian and a shop owner.  I don’t come to this discussion armed with unassailable logic or long-held historical positions.  But I know two things: 1) I am not God, and 2) I AM a “soldier” of the cross, engaged in a war that is constantly fought on a spiritual plane.  Taking only these two things that I know, I would like to address the awful concept of war.

First, I know that I am not God.  In the same way that I will never be able to give a definitive answer to the questions of evil in the world, the random and tragic nature of disease, disaster, and poverty, and other horrors that leave us all scratching our heads, I cannot provide an answer the question of war for everyone and for all time.  For myself, I can only look at what the Bible says (and doesn’t say) about war, examine what I know and may learn from history, and delve into my own heart on the matter.  I think it is important to look at all three BEFORE engaging with anyone else (and this is true not just about war, but about all important issues), and revisit them AFTER engaging with others.  As we seek to know the truth about God and the issues we face, and we raise concerns, it is important to use the resources He has given us.  God doesn’t provide convenient answers to many of our big questions in His word, but He does give us important guidelines that can be applied to any situation.  And history can show us the consequences others have paid for acting on a set of beliefs.  Using all four sources (and earnestly bringing our desires before God in prayer) can give us, not a definitive answer, but a strong and defensible position.

Given these two truths, and looking at the Bible and history as guidelines, I am struck by two things that shape my final conclusion.  First, God calls all of us to actively engage in the world AS IT IS.  We are to build, engage in commerce, plant and reap, enter into contracts, pursue careers, relationships, and civic activities, and live obediently as members of our communities, countries, etc.  This can be done by both pacifists and warriors.  My Quaker ancestors risked their lives and livelihoods to fight for the right of men, women, and children to live in freedom; that they should be able to own land, raise their families, and live peacefully side by side as neighbors, and fellow children of God.  I was privileged to grow up in the community that resulted, one hundred and fifty years of free people of multiple races living together.  The Quakers didn’t’ march off to war, but they supported and didn’t condemn those who did bear arms, and they shouldered the same risks, horrors, and sacrifices as their neighbors.

The second truth I glean from God’s word and history is that we are called to a defensive position in an ongoing spiritual war.  As spiritual warriors, we are not called upon to engage the enemy on our own power, but rather to resist him.  We are to resist temptation, resist the Devil, hold fast, and remain on guard.  God is not our tank or our chariot—he is our strong fortress!  So, whether or not we take up arms in a man-created war, I believe Christians are called on to protect and support their families, communities, and their country—actively, sacrificially, and, when necessary, to the death.

Lila Fair

Author at Conciliar Post


Ryan Shinkel

Catholic Perspective


Asking if Christians can ever be justified in supporting or advocating warfare, either for themselves or for their own nation-state, is to ask if they are committed to pacifism. Can it be morally right for an American Christian to support our President’s order for the current airstrikes in Iraq? The question is not about this particular instance, but concerning the principle itself – not this war, but war in general. Any such discussion, such as this roundtable, will be all too brief, but one can say a few words. A discussion of war in general must first observe that war (i.e. the active killing of another nation’s soldiers, resources, and at times peoples, by another’s nation’s soldiers, not to mention sending them to be killed and mangled as well) is a sin: it shows the fall in man, that he exploits rather than trades, and takes up the sword rather than the plowshare so to speak.

For example, even at times many citizens of European countries involved in WWI were convinced of their nation’s righteousness in the war effort and in the carrying out of that cause, today retrospectively one sees WWI was, qua Peter Hitchens,“the beginning of the end of Christianity in the West” – Christendom falling on its bayonet. Assuming for a moment the cause on one side was justified, seemingly good intentions can bring about disastrous consequence: the German government funded Lenin’s return to Russia and thus caused the Bolshevik Revolution. Disaster arises out of good intentions. Yet in God’s creation it should not be expected by Christians that good effects come from evil actions. Cold War nuclear proliferation arose out of the bombings from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Even G.K. Chesterton observed in The Everlasting Man, written nearly a decade after the end of WWI, that the Church was blamed by some for failing to stop Christian nations from fighting other Christian nations: on “the general view that the Church was discredited by the War—they might as well say that the Ark was discredited by the Flood. When the world goes wrong, it proves rather that the Church is right. The Church is justified, not because her children do not sin, but because they do.” The failure of the Church actually proves its first doctrine, Original Sin, since it shows how culpable we all are in our very nature to cut down each other.

Yet if someone ought to be aware of such propensities in fellow neighbors, then that implies their neighbors can also be their enemies. The Church has thought long about this fact of the universality for human evil (“the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either — but right through every human heart — and through all human hearts”) and out of such reflection has emerged the Just War tradition, with all its criterion and demarcations designed to limit when warfare can be justified, and how it can be carried out. I note however that while there are sins of commission (e.g. bombing of civilians without any military targets in mind), it seems plausible that there are also sins of omission: the West not stoppingthe genocide against Christians and other religious minorities in Iraq by the Islamic State. As Oxford moral theologian Nigel Biggar points out, “Not even pacifists object simply to acts that result in the deaths of other people, for they themselves are prepared to perform deliberate acts of omission, which permit innocents to die at the hands of the unjust.” That is, pacifism itself can be a sin with the particular circumstances. So can a Christian be morally justified in advocating warfare?

It would be interesting to see George Weigel and Stanley Hauerwas in the same room discussing that question. Historically Christians have not always been morally justified. But our question is if ever one can be justified morally, and the answer it seems then that in defense of oneself or in defense of one’s neighbor, one can repel the sin of the unjust attacker, always remembering though that I can be the unjust attacker, or even if my cause is just, my acts of warfare are not, and that neighbors can enemies to each other, and that enemies can one day be neighbors as well. As St. Augustine pointed out, the injustice of the enemy requires rather than the justice of oneself that justifies one to wage violence. Justice demands defense of oneself and one’s neighbor, even against other neighbors; it also demands intending to ultimately reconcile with one’s warring neighbors. To do otherwise is not be a peacemaker: for the purpose of any possible just war is peace, and putting an end to the violence perpetuated by one’s neighbor. In the murky fog of war, there must be the willing of the good of one’s enemy if war is ever justified — a test I doubt many wars ever pass.

Ryan Shinkel

Author at Conciliar Post

Image courtesy of Jim Forest.

Comments

9 responses to “Round Table: Christian Warfare”

  1. Chris Cam Smith Avatar

    Some excellent responses from each of you on this important topic! I am surprised no one mentioned Martin Luther on this issue. I tend to favor his views on warfare. Luther states that war can never under any circumstances be justified in the name of Christ. There can be no such thing as a “Christian” war. However, he does state that Christians can engage in warfare for self-defense or to defend their homeland. Thus, he secularizes it completely. So for Luther, the Crusades were an egregious violation of the tenants of Christianity since they were supposedly done in God’s name. But going to war against the Turks, who were encroaching on European territory at the time he wrote these views, was justified in the name of protecting one’s country. I don’t have source citations off the top of my head, but I’m pretty sure this was laid out in “On War Against the Turks.” Any thoughts on Luther’s view here?

    1. Chris Cam Smith Avatar

      Yeah, I actually read it for a research paper I did on Luther and other Reformers’ views on Islam and the Turks. Despite Luther’s frequent diatribes he does offer some brilliant points from time to time. Anytime I think of Christianity and war I go back to him.

  2. Ben Cabe Avatar

    Staggering photo—too bad we don’t have an Orthodox view to accompany it :). But in all seriousness, I believe this is an important topic and would only like to add one thing. As Christians we are called to martyrdom—there is no getting around this fact. This being the case, instances of self-defense (when it is only oneself in question) are one area where I believe we, as Christians, should not retaliate but rather open ourselves to the other. When a family is involved it gets somewhat more complicated. It is my responsibility as a husband to protect my children and my wife. I will not allow them to be harmed and therefore will fight back if necessary. But when we are talking about countries as a whole it gets even more complicated . . . It must be a case by case basis since very rarely will one ideal work across the whole.

    Hopefully I explained that adequately. To sum up: as Christians we are called to be martyrdom and constant self-giving. As a husband, I am called to protect my family if my family is being threatened although if it is just me, I should not fight back. As a countryman this issue is even more complex.

    I believe Chris was speaking about fallen man when he said that there are far worse things than death. But from a Christian, prelapsarian point of view—from the view of original creation—death is the worst thing that could happen. Death means corruption. Corruption means a rupture in our communion with God. Death is abnormal and should be mourned.

    1. Chris Cam Smith Avatar

      Ben, I think your point about martyrdom shows why Luther was right in that war can never be justified in Christian terms. The truth of the death and resurrection of Christ flat out eliminates the possibility of justifying war, even in self-defense, using the gospel. But as you rightly state, defending one’s family or homeland does change the equation.

  3. Laura Ehlen Avatar
    Laura Ehlen

    Chris,
    As a scholar of Church history, I completely agree with your assertion that wars of past (especially during the Crusades/Middle Ages) were as devastating as wars of the 20th century. However, there is something deeply troubling and even diabolical about how detached mass destruction is. As wrong as it was, in battles such as the Siege of Baghdad in 1258 those committing acts of violence saw what they were doing, we aware of their actions and of the consequences. The death was more real to them than it is when our nation dropped a bomb on a city on an island halfway across the world. That’s what truly troubles me about modern and total war: the detachment from realizing the full extent of one’s acts.

  4. Laura Ehlen Avatar
    Laura Ehlen

    Chris,

    You pinpoint the moral issue of war so precisely: both waging war and engaging in pacifism can stain one’s hands with innocent blood. However, in our broken and violent world, can and should our nation intervene every time terrorism, genocide, or the oppressive evils of harsh dictatorship occur? My heart deeply breaks for my brothers and sisters over the years in Rwanda, Iraq, Sudan, Ukraine, and so on, but should we send our men and women over to face injury and death each time? In situations such as Iraq, our military intervention created a situation that allowed another group to replace the old dictatorship – thus not bringing peace, but only more and different suffering. Prayer may only seem like words, but I question sometimes whether prayer and fasting are not better than intervention, death, and more suffering.

  5. Laura Ehlen Avatar
    Laura Ehlen

    Lila,
    You are very correct in your assertion that we as Christians are spiritual warriors; yet the human person, created in the Image of God, is simultaneously spiritual and corporeal. We are both spiritual souls and physical bodies, inseparably bonded together. We cannot neglect the corporeal in favor of the spiritual, which means we cannot neglect corporeal sufferings as we deal with spiritual temptations. As a scholar of Church history, I interpret the Crusades as representative of this: soldiers, in the spiritual journey to grow in the virtues of faith, courage, perseverance, and hope, took up the sword and the sign of the Cross to battle the very physical threats against their fellow Christians.

  6. Laura Ehlen Avatar
    Laura Ehlen

    Ryan,
    You are very right to remark that war is a result of the Fall. That is one of the first things we encounter in Genesis after the Fall: the small-scale war of Cain against Abel, which culminates with the shedding of Abel’s blood and the banishment of Cain. Yet it is not sufficient in the discussion of moral theology to proclaim something the result of the Fall: the Fall is our reality, and thus our morality must address living in a fallen and sinful world. You state that the question concerns war in general, rather than particular, but the very nuances of just war and the nature of moral theology require that we examine each war in particular. My question for you is this: if both pacifism and war are sinful, what is the option for the Christian?

  7. […] Round Table: Christian Warfare by Conciliar Post […]

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Conciliar Post

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading