Just war theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory

Saint Augustine was the first clear advocate of just-war theory.

The just war theory (Latin: bellum iustum) is a doctrine, also referred to as a tradition, of military ethics that aims to ensure that a war is morally justifiable through a series of criteria, all of which must be met for a war to be considered just. It has been studied by military leaders, theologians, ethicists and policymakers. The criteria are split into two groups: jus ad bellum ("right to go to war") and jus in bello ("right conduct in war"). There have been calls for the inclusion of a third category of just war theory (jus post bellum) dealing with the morality of post-war settlement and reconstruction. The just war theory postulates that war, while it is terrible but less so with the right conduct, is not always the worst option, but justifiable when justice is an objective of armed conflict. Important responsibilities, undesirable outcomes, or preventable atrocities may justify war.

Opponents of the just war theory may either be inclined to a stricter pacifist standard (proposing that there has never been nor can there ever be a justifiable basis for war) or they may be inclined toward a more permissive nationalist standard (proposing that a war need only to serve a nation's interests to be justifiable). In many cases, philosophers state that individuals do not need to be plagued by a guilty conscience if they are required to fight. A few philosophers ennoble the virtues of the soldier while they also declare their apprehensions for war itself. A few, such as Rousseau, argue for insurrection against oppressive rule.

The historical aspect, or the "just war tradition", deals with the historical body of rules or agreements that have applied in various wars across the ages. The just war tradition also considers the writings of various philosophers and lawyers through history, and examines both their philosophical visions of war's ethical limits and whether their thoughts have contributed to the body of conventions that have evolved to guide war and warfare.

In the twenty-first century there has been significant debate between traditional just war theorists, who largely support the existing law of war and develop arguments to support it, and revisionists who reject many traditional assumptions, although not necessarily advocating a change in the law.

Origins

Ancient Egypt

A 2017 study found that the just war tradition can be traced as far back as to Ancient Egypt. Egyptian ethics of war usually centered on three main ideas, these including the cosmological role of Egypt, the pharaoh as a divine office and executor of the will of the gods, and the superiority of the Egyptian state and population over all other states and peoples. Egyptian political theology held that the pharaoh had the exclusive legitimacy in justly initiating a war, usually claimed to carry out the will of the gods. Senusret I, in the Twelfth Dynasty, claimed, "I was nursed to be a conqueror...his [Atum's] son and his protector, he gave me to conquer what he conquered." Later pharaohs also considered their sonship of the god Amun-Re as granting them absolute ability to declare war on the deity's behalf. Pharaohs often visited temples prior to initiating campaigns, where the pharaoh was believed to receive their commands of war from the deities. For example, Kamose claimed that "I went north because I was strong (enough) to attack the Asiatics through the command of Amon, the just of counsels." A stele erected by Thutmose III at the Temple of Amun at Karnak "provides an unequivocal statement of the pharaoh's divine mandate to wage war on his enemies." As the period of the New Kingdom progressed and Egypt heightened its territorial ambition, so did the invocation of just war aid the justification of these efforts. The universal principle of Maat, signifying order and justice, was central to the Egyptian notion of just war and its ability to guarantee Egypt virtually no limits on what it could take, do, or use to guarantee the ambitions of the state.

India

The Indian Hindu epic, the Mahabharata, offers the first written discussions of a "just war" (dharma-yuddha or "righteous war"). In it, one of five ruling brothers (Pandavas) asks if the suffering caused by war can ever be justified. A long discussion then ensues between the siblings, establishing criteria like proportionality (chariots cannot attack cavalry, only other chariots; no attacking people in distress), just means (no poisoned or barbed arrows), just cause (no attacking out of rage), and fair treatment of captives and the wounded.

In Sikhism, the term dharamyudh describes a war that is fought for just, righteous or religious reasons, especially in defence of one's own beliefs. Though some core tenets in the Sikh religion are understood to emphasise peace and nonviolence, especially before the 1606 execution of Guru Arjan by Mughal Emperor Jahangir, military force may be justified if all peaceful means to settle a conflict have been exhausted, thus resulting in a dharamyudh.

East Asian

Chinese philosophy produced a massive body of work on warfare, much of it during the Zhou dynasty, especially the Warring States era. War was justified only as a last resort and only by the rightful sovereign; however, questioning the decision of the emperor concerning the necessity of a military action was not permissible. The success of a military campaign was sufficient proof that the campaign had been righteous.

Japan did not develop its own doctrine of just war but between the 5th and the 7th centuries drew heavily from Chinese philosophy, and especially Confucian views. As part of the Japanese campaign to take the northeastern island Honshu, Japanese military action was portrayed as an effort to "pacify" the Emishi people, who were likened to "bandits" and "wild-hearted wolf cubs" and accused of invading Japan's frontier lands.

Ancient Greece and Rome

The notion of just war in Europe originates and is developed first in ancient Greece and then in the Roman Empire.

It was Aristotle who first introduced the concept and terminology to the Hellenic world that called war a last resort requiring conduct that would allow the restoration of peace. Aristotle argues that the cultivation of a military is necessary and good for the purpose of self-defense, not for conquering: "The proper object of practising military training is not in order that men may enslave those who do not deserve slavery, but in order that first they may themselves avoid becoming enslaved to others" (Politics, Book 7).

Stoic philosopher Panaetius considered war inhuman, but he contemplated just war when it was impossible to bring peace and justice by peaceful means. Just war could be waged solely for retribution or defense, in both cases having to be declared officially. He also established the importance of treating the defeated in a civilized way, especially those who surrendered, even after a prolonged conflict.

In ancient Rome, a "just cause" for war might include the necessity of repelling an invasion, or retaliation for pillaging or a breach of treaty. War was always potentially nefas ("wrong, forbidden"), and risked religious pollution and divine disfavor. A "just war" (bellum iustum) thus required a ritualized declaration by the fetial priests. More broadly, conventions of war and treaty-making were part of the ius gentium, the "law of nations", the customary moral obligations regarded as innate and universal to human beings.

Christian views

Christian Just War thinking is often thought to begin with Saint Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, before being developed further by his contemporary Saint Augustine of Hippo. The Just War theory, with some amendments, is still used by Christians today as a guide to whether or not a war can be justified, and how it should be fought. Christians may argue "Sometimes war may be necessary and right, even though it may not be good." In the case of a country that has been invaded by an occupying force, for example, war may be the only way to restore justice. 

Saint Ambrose

Influenced by Roman law, and Cicero in particular, Ambrose believed that war was legitimate only for defensive purposes or the punishment of serious wrongdoing, and rulers were obliged to respect treaties, avoid exploiting enemies and treat the defeated with mercy. Ambrose also seems to have regarded military force as permissible against heretics, or in support of Christian orthodoxy. Nevertheless, he strictly prohibited the Church from direct involvement in violence, insisting that clergy must not take up arms themselves. Similarly, warfare had to be undertaken only to fulfill divine law, not for personal motives, and any war driven by emotional excess, vindictiveness or other disordered intentions fell outside the moral limits he envisioned.

Saint Augustine

Saint Augustine held that Christians should not resort immediately to violence, but that God has given the sword to governments for a good reason (based upon Romans 13:4). In Contra Faustum Manichaeum book 22 sections 69–76, the main source for his just war ideas, Augustine argues that Christians, as part of a government, need not be ashamed of protecting peace and punishing wickedness when they are obliged to do so. Augustine regarded intention as the main determinant of whether a war was just or sinful: "What is here required is not a bodily action, but an inward disposition. The sacred seat of virtue is the heart."

Nonetheless, Augustine asserted that peaceful inaction in the face of a grave wrong that could be rectified only by violence would be a sin. Defense of oneself or the innocent could therefore be a necessity, especially when authorized by a legitimate state authority:

They who have waged war in obedience to the divine command, or in conformity with His laws, have represented in their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in this capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no means violated the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill."

But, say they, the wise man will wage Just Wars. As if he would not all the rather lament the necessity of just wars, if he remembers that he is a man; for if they were not just he would not wage them, and would therefore be delivered from all wars.

No war is undertaken by a good state except on behalf of good faith or for safety.

According to J. Mark Mattox:

In terms of the traditional notion of jus ad bellum [the circumstances under which wars can be justly fought] ... war is a coping mechanism for righteous sovereigns who would ensure that their violent international encounters are minimal, a reflection of the Divine Will to the greatest extent possible, and always justified. In terms of the traditional notion of jus in bello [justice in war, or the moral considerations which ought to constrain the use of violence in war], war is a coping mechanism for righteous combatants who, by divine edict, have no choice but to subject themselves to their political masters and seek to ensure that they execute their war-fighting duty as justly as possible.

To summarize, Augustine explored the relationship between Christian charity and the use of force in greater philosophical depth than Saint Ambrose, though he ultimately affirmed many of the same principles. Augustine did not attempt to craft a systematic doctrine of just war, and his comments on it are scattered across his writing. Even so, the foundations of what later became the classical just war tradition can be clearly identified in his thought.

For Augustine, as for Ambrose, war could also be understood as analogous to a judicial process, in which the political authority uses war to punish those who commit injustice. Indeed, he compared military action to civil litigation seeking restitution or punitive redress. Since God was the ultimate judge, and there were Old Testament precedents for His ordering of wars against Israel's enemies and unbelievers, just war could also become holy war or religious war.

Several core just war principles emerge from Augustine's writing:

Legitimate authority: Only public authorities may wage war; private individuals have no right to initiate armed conflict.

Just cause: Defense of the community, protection of allies, or redress for wrongful acts are just causes for war, though Augustine also allowed for offensive action under certain circumstances, citing Moses’ expulsion of the Amorites after they denied Israel peaceful passage.

Right intention: Proper inner disposition is essential. A ruler or soldier must act with a mindset comparable to that of a Christian judge or executioner—firm yet guided by love and compassion. Actions motivated by revenge, wrath, or greed invalidate any claim to justice in war.

Finally, the ultimate goal of just war must be to establish peace.

Saint Isidore of Seville

Isidore of Seville writes:

Those wars are unjust which are undertaken without cause. For aside from vengeance or to fight off enemies no just war can be waged.

Isidore offers a succinct definition of just war in his Etymologiae, describing it as a conflict “waged by formal declaration, either to recover seized property or to drive off an enemy”. He immediately contrasts this with unjust war, following ideas drawn from Cicero’s De re publica. Although Isidore’s brief, essentially Roman, formulation did not fully engage with Augustine’s more sophisticated thinking, and did not fully incorporate subsequent Christian or post-Roman developments, it nevertheless became, like the writings of Saint Gregory of Tours, an important conduit through which the conception of just war entered the high medieval period, informing the Decretum of Gratian in particular.

Carolingian period

The just war ideas of Saint Augustine of Hippo and other Church Fathers were transmitted via Saint Isidore of Seville, Saint Gregory of Tours and other scholars into the Carolingian period, informing the Christianizing imperial project of Charlemagne and the consequent Carolingian Renaissance. Just/ holy war ideas about legitimate authority, just cause, punishment of enemies/unbelievers and the establishment of peace therefore gained traction, though traditional Christian concerns, particularly among clerics, about the sinfulness of killing in war, or being killed in a state of sin, were reflected in sermons, liturgies and penitential texts. This led to increasing deployment of military chaplains to enable soldiers to confess their sins, and thereby reconcile themselves with God, before battle. Proto-jus in bello rules to protect non-combatants such as clergy, nuns, widows, orphans and the poor, including their property, also began to appear in ecclesiastical texts, as well as some capitularies (laws or ordinances) issued by Charlemagne and other rulers, anticipating the later Peace of God, and Truce of God movements.

Peace and Truce of God

Main article: Peace and Truce of God

The medieval Peace of God (Latin: pax dei) was a 10th century mass movement in Western Europe instigated by the clergy that granted immunity from violence for non-combatants.

Starting in the 11th Century, the Truce of God (Latin: treuga dei) involved Church rules that successfully limited when and where fighting could occur: Catholic forces (e.g. of warring barons) could not fight each other on Sundays, Thursdays, holidays, the entirety of Lent and Advent and other times, severely disrupting the conduct of wars. The 1179 Third Council of the Lateran adopted a version of it for the whole church.

Saint Thomas Aquinas

Further information: Thomas Aquinas § Just war

Saint Thomas Aquinas contributed to the development of the just war theory in medieval Europe.

The just war theory by Saint Thomas Aquinas has had a lasting impact on later generations of thinkers and was part of an emerging consensus in medieval Europe on just war. In the 13th century Aquinas reflected in detail on peace and war. Aquinas was a Dominican friar and contemplated the teachings of the Bible on peace and war in combination with ideas from Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Saint Augustine and other philosophers whose writings are part of the Western canon. Aquinas' views on war drew heavily on the Decretum Gratiani, a book the Italian monk Gratian had compiled with passages from the Bible. After its publication in the 12th century, the Decretum Gratiani had been republished with commentary from Pope Innocent IV and the Dominican friar Raymond of Penafort. Other significant influences on Aquinas just war theory were Alexander of Hales and Henry of Segusio.

In Summa Theologica Aquinas asserted that it is not always a sin to wage war, and he set out criteria for a just war. According to Aquinas, three requirements must be met. Firstly, the war must be waged upon the command of a rightful sovereign. Secondly, the war needs to be waged for just cause, on account of some wrong the attacked have committed. Thirdly, warriors must have the right intent, namely to promote good and to avoid evil. Aquinas came to the conclusion that a just war could be offensive and that injustice should not be tolerated so as to avoid war. Nevertheless, Aquinas argued that violence must only be used as a last resort. On the battlefield, violence was only justified to the extent it was necessary. Soldiers needed to avoid cruelty and a just war was limited by the conduct of just combatants. Aquinas argued that it was only in the pursuit of justice, that the good intention of a moral act could justify negative consequences, including the killing of the innocent during a war.

Renaissance and Christian Humanists

Various Renaissance humanists promoted Pacificist views.

• John Colet famously preached a Lenten sermon before Henry VIII, who was preparing for a war, quoting Cicero "Better an unjust peace rather than the justest war."
• Erasmus of Rotterdam wrote numerous works on peace which criticized Just War theory as a smokescreen and added extra limitations, notably The Complaint of Peace and the Treatise on War (Dulce bellum inexpertis).

A leading humanist writer after the Reformation was legal theorist Hugo Grotius, whose De jura belli ac pacis re-considered Just War and fighting wars justly.

First World War

At the beginning of the First World War, a group of theologians in Germany published a manifesto that sought to justify the actions of the German government. At the British government's request, Randall Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury, took the lead in collaborating with a large number of other religious leaders, including some with whom he had differed in the past, to write a rebuttal of the Germans' contentions. Both German and British theologians based themselves on the just war theory, each group seeking to prove that it applied to the war waged by its own side.

Contemporary Catholic doctrine

The just war doctrine of the Catholic Church found in the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church, in paragraph 2309, lists four strict conditions for "legitimate defense by military force:"

• The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave and certain.
• All other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective.
• There must be serious prospects of success.
• The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated.

The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church elaborates on the just war doctrine in paragraphs 500 to 501, while citing the Charter of the United Nations:

If this responsibility justifies the possession of sufficient means to exercise this right to defense, States still have the obligation to do everything possible "to ensure that the conditions of peace exist, not only within their own territory but throughout the world". It is important to remember that "it is one thing to wage a war of self-defense; it is quite another to seek to impose domination on another nation. The possession of war potential does not justify the use of force for political or military objectives. Nor does the mere fact that war has unfortunately broken out mean that all is fair between the warring parties".

The Charter of the United Nations ... is based on a generalized prohibition of a recourse to force to resolve disputes between States, with the exception of two cases: legitimate defence and measures taken by the Security Council within the area of its responsibilities for maintaining peace. In every case, exercising the right to self-defence must respect "the traditional limits of necessity and proportionality".

Therefore, engaging in a preventive war without clear proof that an attack is imminent cannot fail to raise serious moral and juridical questions. International legitimacy for the use of armed force, on the basis of rigorous assessment and with well-founded motivations, can only be given by the decision of a competent body that identifies specific situations as threats to peace and authorizes an intrusion into the sphere of autonomy usually reserved to a State.

— Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church

Pope John Paul II in an address to a group of soldiers noted the following:

Peace, as taught by Sacred Scripture and the experience of men itself, is more than just the absence of war. And the Christian is aware that on earth a human society that is completely and always peaceful is, unfortunately, an utopia and that the ideologies which present it as easily attainable only nourish vain hopes. The cause of peace will not go forward by denying the possibility and the obligation to defend it.

Russian Orthodox Church

The War and Peace section in the Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church is crucial for understanding the Russian Orthodox Church's attitude towards war. The document offers criteria of distinguishing between an aggressive war, which is unacceptable, and a justified war, attributing the highest moral and sacred value of military acts of bravery to a true believer who participates in a justified war. Additionally, the document considers the just war criteria as developed in Western Christianity to be eligible for Russian Orthodoxy; therefore, the justified war theory in Western theology is also applicable to the Russian Orthodox Church.

In the same document, it is stated that wars have accompanied human history since the fall of man, and according to the gospel, they will continue to accompany it. While recognizing war as evil, the Russian Orthodox Church does not prohibit its members from participating in hostilities if there is the security of their neighbours and the restoration of trampled justice at stake. War is considered to be necessary but undesirable. It is also stated that the Russian Orthodox Church has had profound respect for soldiers who gave their lives to protect the life and security of their neighbours.

Just war tradition

The just war theory, propounded by the medieval Christian philosopher Thomas Aquinas, was developed further by legal scholars in the context of international law. Cardinal Cajetan, the jurist Francisco de Vitoria, the two Jesuit priests Luis de Molina and Francisco Suárez, as well as the humanist Hugo Grotius and the lawyer Luigi Taparelli were most influential in the formation of a just war tradition. The just war tradition, which was well established by the 19th century, found its practical application in the Hague Peace Conferences (1899 and 1907) and in the founding of the League of Nations in 1920. After the United States Congress declared war on Germany in 1917, Cardinal James Gibbons issued a letter that all Catholics were to support the war because "Our Lord Jesus Christ does not stand for peace at any price... If by Pacifism is meant the teaching that the use of force is never justifiable, then, however well meant, it is mistaken, and it is hurtful to the life of our country."

Armed conflicts such as the Spanish Civil War, World War II and the Cold War were, as a matter of course, judged according to the norms (as established in Aquinas' just war theory) by philosophers such as Jacques Maritain, Elizabeth Anscombe and John Finnis.

The first work dedicated specifically to just war was the 15th-century sermon De bellis justis of Stanisław of Skarbimierz (1360–1431), who justified war by the Kingdom of Poland against the Teutonic Knights. Francisco de Vitoria criticized the conquest of America by the Spanish conquistadors on the basis of just-war theory. With Alberico Gentili and Hugo Grotius, just war theory was replaced by international law theory, codified as a set of rules, which today still encompass the points commonly debated, with some modifications.

Just-war theorists combine a moral abhorrence towards war with a readiness to accept that war may sometimes be necessary. The criteria of the just-war tradition act as an aid in determining whether resorting to arms is morally permissible. Just-war theories aim "to distinguish between justifiable and unjustifiable uses of organized armed forces"; they attempt "to conceive of how the use of arms might be restrained, made more humane, and ultimately directed towards the aim of establishing lasting peace and justice".

The just war tradition addresses the morality of the use of force in two parts: when it is right to resort to armed force (the concern of jus ad bellum) and what is acceptable in using such force (the concern of jus in bello).

In 1869 the Russian military theorist Genrikh Antonovich Leer [ru] theorized on the advantages and potential benefits of war.

The Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin defined only three types of just war.

But picture to yourselves a slave-owner who owned 100 slaves warring against a slave-owner who owned 200 slaves for a more "just" distribution of slaves. Clearly, the application of the term "defensive" war, or war "for the defense of the fatherland" in such a case would be historically false, and in practice would be sheer deception of the common people, of philistines, of ignorant people, by the astute slaveowners. Precisely in this way are the present-day imperialist bourgeoisie deceiving the peoples by means of "national ideology" and the term "defense of the fatherland" in the present war between slave-owners for fortifying and strengthening slavery.

The anarcho-capitalist scholar Murray Rothbard (1926–1995) stated that "a just war exists when a people tries to ward off the threat of coercive domination by another people, or to overthrow an already-existing domination. A war is unjust, on the other hand, when a people try to impose domination on another people or try to retain an already-existing coercive rule over them."

Jonathan Riley-Smith writes:

The consensus among Christians on the use of violence has changed radically since the crusades were fought. The just war theory prevailing for most of the last two centuries—that violence is an evil that can, in certain situations, be condoned as the lesser of evils—is relatively young. Although it has inherited some elements (the criteria of legitimate authority, just cause, right intention) from the older war theory that first evolved around AD 400, it has rejected two premises that underpinned all medieval just wars, including crusades: first, that violence could be employed on behalf of Christ's intentions for mankind and could even be directly authorized by him; and second, that it was a morally neutral force that drew whatever ethical coloring it had from the intentions of the perpetrators.

Criteria

The just war theory has two sets of criteria, the first establishing jus ad bellum (the right to go to war), and the second establishing jus in bello (right conduct within war).

Jus ad bellum

Main article: Jus ad bellum

The just war theory directs jus ad bellum to norms that aim to require certain circumstances to enable the right to go to war.

Competent authority

Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war. "A just war must be initiated by a political authority within a political system that allows distinctions of justice. Dictatorships (e.g. Hitler's regime) or deceptive military actions (e.g. the 1968 US bombing of Cambodia) are typically considered as violations of this criterion. The importance of this condition is key. Plainly, we cannot have a genuine process of judging a just war within a system that represses the process of genuine justice. A just war must be initiated by a political authority within a political system that allows distinctions of justice".

Probability of success

According to this principle, there must be good grounds for concluding that aims of the just war are achievable. This principle emphasizes that mass violence must not be undertaken if it is unlikely to secure the just cause. This criterion is to avoid invasion for invasion's sake and links to the proportionality criteria. One cannot invade if there is no chance of actually winning. However, wars are fought with imperfect knowledge, so one must simply be able to make a logical case that one can win; there is no way to know this in advance. These criteria move the conversation from moral and theoretical grounds to practical grounds. Essentially, this is meant to gather coalition building and win approval of other state actors.

Last resort

The principle of last resort stipulates that all non-violent options must first be exhausted before the use of force can be justified. Diplomatic options, sanctions, and other non-military methods must be attempted or validly ruled out before the engagement of hostilities. Further, in regard to the amount of harm—proportionally—the principle of last resort would support using small intervention forces first and then escalating rather than starting a war with massive force such as carpet bombing or nuclear warfare.

Just cause

The reason for going to war needs to be just and cannot, therefore, be solely for recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong; innocent life must be in imminent danger and intervention must be to protect life. A contemporary view of just cause was expressed in 1993 when the US Catholic Conference said: "Force may be used only to correct a grave, public evil, i.e., aggression or massive violation of the basic human rights of whole populations."

Jus in bello

Once war has begun, just war theory (jus in bello) also directs how combatants are to act or should act:

Distinction

Just war conduct is governed by the principle of distinction. The acts of war should be directed towards enemy combatants, and not towards non-combatants caught in circumstances that they did not create. The prohibited acts include bombing civilian residential areas that include no legitimate military targets, committing acts of terrorism or reprisal against civilians or prisoners of war (POWs), and attacking neutral targets. Moreover, combatants are not permitted to attack enemy combatants who have surrendered, or who have been captured, or who are injured and not presenting an immediate lethal threat, or who are parachuting from disabled aircraft and are not airborne forces, or who are shipwrecked.

Proportionality

Just war conduct is governed by the principle of proportionality. Combatants must make sure that the harm caused to civilians or civilian property is not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated by an attack on a legitimate military objective. This principle is meant to discern the correct balance between the restriction imposed by a corrective measure and the severity of the nature of the prohibited act.

Military necessity

Just war conduct is governed by the principle of military necessity. An attack or action must be intended to help in the defeat of the enemy; it must be an attack on a legitimate military objective, and the harm caused to civilians or civilian property must be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. Jus in bello allows for military necessity and does not favor a specific justification in allowing for counter-attack recourse.^[90] This principle is meant to limit excessive and unnecessary death and destruction.

Fair treatment of prisoners of war

Enemy combatants who surrendered or who are captured no longer pose a threat. It is therefore wrong to torture them or otherwise mistreat them.

No means malum in se

Combatants may not use weapons or other methods of warfare that are considered evil, such as mass rape, forcing enemy combatants to fight against their own side or using weapons whose effects cannot be controlled (e.g., nuclear/biological weapons).

Ending a war: Jus post bellum

In recent years, some theorists, such as Gary Bass, Louis Iasiello and Brian Orend, have proposed a third category within the just war theory. "Jus post bellum is described by some scholars as a new "discipline," or as "a new category of international law currently under construction". Jus post bellum concerns justice after a war, including peace treaties, reconstruction, environmental remediation, war crimes trials, and war reparations. Jus post bellum has been added to deal with the fact that some hostile actions may take place outside a traditional battlefield. Jus post bellum governs the justice of war termination and peace agreements, as well as the prosecution of war criminals, and publicly labelled terrorists.The idea has largely been used to help decide what to do with prisoners taken during battle. It is through government labeling and public opinion that people use jus post bellum to justify the pursuit of individuals labeled as terrorists for the safety of the government's state in a modern context. The actual fault lies with the aggressor, and by being the aggressor, they forfeit their rights to honorable treatment by their actions. That theory is used to justify the actions taken by anyone fighting in a war to treat prisoners outside the bounds of war.

Traditionalists and revisionists

There are two altering views related to the just war theory that scholars align with, which are traditionalists and revisionists. The debates between these different viewpoints rest on the moral responsiblites of actors in jus in bello.

Traditionalists

In the just war theory as it pertains to jus in bello, traditionalist scholars view that the two principles, jus ad bellum and jus in bello, are distinct in which actors in war are morally responsible. The traditional view places accountability on leaders who start the war, while soldiers are accountable for actions breaking jus in bello.

Revisionists

Revisionist scholars view that moral responsibility in conduct of war is placed on individual soldiers who participate in war, even if they follow the rules associated with jus in bello. Soldiers that participate in unjust wars are morally responsible. The revisionist view is based on an individual level, rather than on a collective whole.

Additionally, the distinctive methodologies associated with the use of nuclear weapons to wage mass war in the modern era, have also led some "nonreductive" revisionists question the relevance the just war theory itself. Such particular criticisms are more limited in scope, however, than the generalized objections which have been raised by both realists and pacifists.

Catholic peace traditions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_peace_traditions

"There will be no peace among the nations without peace among the religions. There will be no peace among the religions without dialogue among the religions." Hans Küng, Swiss Catholic priest, theologian, and author.

Sermon on the Mount by Carl Bloch

Catholic peace traditions begin with its biblical and classical origins and continue on to the current practice in the twenty-first century. Because of its long history and breadth of geographical and cultural diversity, this Catholic tradition encompasses many strains and influences of both religious and secular peacemaking and many aspects of Christian pacifism, just war and nonviolence.

Catholic tradition as a whole supports and favours peacemaking efforts. Peacemaking is an integral part of Catholic social teaching.

Definitions

The history of peacemaking in the Catholic tradition reflects the religious meanings of peace, tied to positive virtues, such as love, and to the personal and social works of justice. The Greek word for peace is eirene; Roman pax, and in the Hebrew Bible, shalom.

For the earliest Romans, "pax" meant to live in a state of agreement, where discord and war were absent. In his Meditations, or To Himself, the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius expresses peace as a state of unperturbed tranquility. The English word "peace" derives ultimately from its root, the Latin "pax".

Shalom (Hebrew: שלום) is the word for peace in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh or Hebrew: תנ"ך), and has other meanings also pertaining to well being, including use as a greeting.

Eirene

The Greek meaning for peace, contained in the word eirene, evolved over the course of Greco-Roman civilization from such agricultural meanings as prosperity, fertility, and security of home contained in Hesiod's Works and Days, to more internal meanings of peace formulated by the Stoics, such as Epictetus.

Eirene is the word that the New Testament generally uses for peace, one of the twenty words used by the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible used in the largely Greek-speaking Jewish communities throughout the Greco-Roman world. It is chiefly through the Septuagint's use of Greek that the Greek word eirene became infused with all the religious imagery and richness of the word shalom in the Hebrew Bible that had evolved over the history of the Jewish people. Subsequently, the use of the Greek Bible as the basis for St. Jerome's Vulgate translation into Latin then brought all the new meanings of eirene to the Latin word pax and transformed it from a term for an imposed order of the sword, the Pax Romana, into the chief image of peace for Western Christianity.

New Testament

Christ in Gethsemane commands Peter to lay down his sword (fresco by Giotto)

The Gospels present the birth of Jesus as ushering in a new age of peace. In Luke, Zechariah celebrates his son John:

And you, child, will be called prophet of the Most High, for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give his people knowledge of salvation through the forgiveness of their sins, because of the tender mercy of our God by which the daybreak from on high will visit us to shine on those who sit in darkness and death's shadow, to guide our feet into the path of peace.

And later, the angels appear to the shepherds at Bethlehem, "And suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying: 'Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests'" – a peace distinct from the Pax Romana.

The Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 5:1-16) and the Sermon on the Plain (Lk. 6:20-45) combine with the call to "love your enemies" (Mt. 5:38-48) to encapsulate Jesus' teachings on peacemaking. According to Gabriel Moran, the Sermon on the Mount does not advocate submission to oppressors, but rather a strategy to "de-hostilize enemies in order to win them over".

The account of the healing of the centurion's servant suggests to John Eppstein that Jesus did not view military service as sinful, since rather than reprove the soldier for his profession, Jesus praised him for his faith. Nor did Peter require Cornelius to resign his commission or desert upon being baptized. John the Baptist's advice to soldiers was, "Do not practice extortion, do not falsely accuse anyone, and be satisfied with your wages."

Early Church

Early Christianity was relatively pacifist. Clement of Alexandria wrote, "If you enroll as one of God's people, heaven is your country and God your lawgiver. And what are his laws? You shall not kill, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. To him that strikes you on the one cheek, turn to him the other also." (Protrepticus 10)

The early Christians anticipated the eminent return of the Lord in glory, even to the extent that Paul had to tell some of them to get back to work. Generally they were not deeply involved in the larger community. As it became apparent that a more nuanced understanding was called for, Christians came to realize that if they were to survive socially they could not remain within the confines of their own community.

Christians in the Roman Army

St Martin leaves the life of chivalry and renounces the army (fresco by Simone Martini)

St. Paul wrote, "Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. ... This is why you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Pay to all their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, toll to whom toll is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due."

The early Christian church believed that Christians should not take up arms in any war, and so struggled attempting to balance the obligation to be a good citizen and the question of whether it was permissible to take up arms to defend one's country. There developed a gap between the reasoning of the moral theorists and the practice of the private citizen.

As early as second century, Christians began to participate in Roman military, police, and government in large numbers. Military service was one way available to make a living, and on the borders of the empire there was a need to defend against barbarian incursions. As the army came to take on duties more in the line of police work: traffic and customs control, firefighting, the apprehension of criminals and bandits, maintaining the peace, quelling street brawls, and performing the roles of engineering, clearance, and other works of building for which the Roman army was well known, this choice became less problematic. The numbers of soldiers that came to be counted among the later martyrs indicates that many Christians served in the military, despite their abhorrence of war.

From about the middle of the second century, officers in the Roman army were expected to participate in the Imperial Cult and sacrifice to the emperor. During the reign of Diocletian this obligation was extended to the lower ranks, as a test for those suspected of being Christian. Christians were therefore counseled not to enlist so as to avoid needless blood guilt and the risk of idolatry, but should nonetheless continue to pray for the civil authorities.

Among the better-known soldier saints are Saint Marinus, Marcellus of Tangier, and Maximilian of Tebessa, and Martin of Tours.

Martyrdom as non-violent protest

St. Lawrence. Mosaic from the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna, Italy

Persecutions were sporadic and in the third century, largely local. By and large the Roman government didn't pay much attention to Christianity.

Christians sought to live the injunction to love their enemies while resisting their evil, even if this involved persecution and death: these were the martyrs. The word martyr is the Greek for "witness". The early martyrs followed a long-standing tradition; John the Baptist was beheaded for "speaking truth to power". They also had as examples St. Stephen, the apostles James, Philip, and Matthew, and others. According to Josephine Laffin, martyrdom demonstrated to all that Christ had overcome death, and that the Holy Spirit sustained the Church in its fight against darkness and evil.

Martyrs of Cordoba

The Mosque in Cordoba. Photo:Timor Espallargas

The Martyrs of Córdoba were forty-eight Christian martyrs living in the ninth-century Muslim-ruled Al-Andalus. Their hagiography describes in detail their executions for deliberately sought capital violations of Muslim law in Al-Andalus. The martyrdoms recorded by Eulogius took place between 851 and 859; with few exceptions, the Christians invited execution by making public statements tactically chosen to invite martyrdom by appearing before the Muslim authorities to denounce Islam. The martyrs caused tension not only between Muslims and Christians, but within the Christian community. In December 852 Church leaders called a council in Cordoba, which honored those fallen but called on Christians to refrain from seeking martyrdom.

Recent historical interpretation of the martyr movement reflect questions on its nature. Kenneth Baxter Wolf sees its cause in "spiritual anxiety" and the penitential aspect of ninth-century Iberian Christianity. Clayton J. Drees sees their motives in a "pathological death-wish, the product of unexpressed hatred toward society that had turned inward against themselves" and other innate "psychological imbalances". Jessica A. Coope suggests that it reflects a protest against the process of assimilation, and that the martyrs demonstrated a determination to assert Christian identity.

Age of Constantine

Bust of Constantine. (Rome, Capitoline Museum)

With the triumph of Constantine as sole Roman emperor in 313, the church of the martyrs now found itself an accepted and favored religion, soon to become the official religion of the state. Constantine had an emblem inscribed on the shields of his soldiers that has been various described as representing the "Unconquerable Sun" or as a Chi-Rho. Eileen Egan quotes Burkhardt's observation that this was "an emblem which every man could interpret as he pleased, but which the Christians would refer to themselves."

As the religion of the empire, its survival was tied to the fate of the Empire. The threat of increased barbarian incursions therefore threatened both, and defense of the Empire was appropriate in order to protect Christianity. The early trend toward pacifism became muted.

Ambrose of Milan, former Pretorian Prefect of northern Italy before being elected bishop of Milan, preserved the Christian presumption against the use of violence, unless it was needed to protect important social values. While rejecting resorting to violence in self-defense, he argued that charity demanded one protect one's neighbour. "He who does not ward off injury from his comrade, when he is able to, is just as guilty as he who does the injury."

When the Empress Justina sought to have the new basilica in Milan turned over to the Arians, Ambrose, supported by the faithful, occupied it himself in what Egan identifies as an example of non-violent resistance.

Augustine of Hippo

Main article: Just war theory

Following Ambrose, Augustine thought that the Christian, in imitation of Jesus, should not use violence to defend himself, but however, had an obligation to aid a victim under attack.

Augustine of Hippo agreed strongly with the conventional wisdom of his time, that Christians should be pacifists philosophically, but that they should use defense as a means of preserving peace in the long run. He routinely argued that pacifism did not prevent the defence of innocents. In essence, the pursuit of peace might require fighting to preserve it in the long-term. Such a war must not be preemptive, but defensive, to restore peace.

Augustine drew on Roman tradition to view a "just war" as one prosecuted under lawful authority for a just cause, i.e., repelling aggression or injury, retaking something wrongly seized, or to punish wrongdoing. Later other theorists expanded on this. War must be the last resort, have a reasonable chance of success, and produce more good than harm. The church also argued that non-combatants must be protected.

Augustine drew no distinction between offensive and defensive wars, since remedying injuries was a just cause apart from defence. Against the threat of chaos and breakdown of civil order, a man may wage war justly but lament his unavoidable duty.

Barbarian Invasions

During Augustine's last days Vandals invaded North Africa. Barbarian incursions which later swept Europe in succeeding centuries resulted in a collapse of learning and culture, and population decline. There is a long historical tradition that has collected ample evidence to show that the Roman Empire itself was undergoing profound social, economic, and spiritual changes that were only hastened by the invasions. As the Western Empire crumbled the Church became the stabilizing force for order and peace.

The Christian peacemakers of this period were not the dominant cultural or political force of their time, but were either marginalized minorities — as in the case of the Roman Empire or — as in the case of the missionaries who evangelized the barbarians — were actually reaching out from an oppressive and collapsing world to an anarchic one that offered the seeds of a new society. Among the more important figures of active peacemaking or of intellectual life worth further study were Martin of Tours, Salvian of Marseilles, Nicetas of Remesiana, Germanus of Auxerre, Severinus of Noricum, St. Patrick, St. Genevieve of Paris, Columban, and St. Boniface of Crediton.

Monasticism

Hieronymous Bosch, Temptation of St. Anthony. Madrid, Prado Museum

It is no coincidence that the appearance of the first monks comes within a few years of Constantine's assumption of power and the alliance of church and empire that he forged. Thomas Merton identified one of the reasons individuals sought out the desert was that they "declined to be ruled by men, but had no desire to rule over others themselves'. Others sought to imitate Jesus' own time spent in the desert.

Monasticism was, in a sense, a continuation of martyrdom, reaffirming the contradiction between the Church and the world, by fleeing from the corruption of civilization in order to seek a greater treasure.

Christian monasticism started in Egypt, then spread to Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, and finally to Italy and southern Gaul. Anthony the Hermit (c. 251-356), the founder of monasticism, and Pachomius (c. 290-346) were the prototypes.

Penitentials

The penitentials, written by Irish monks, were a series of manuals designed for priests who heard confessions that specified certain penances for certain categories of sins. These "penitentials" borrowed inspiration and specific regulations from the early church councils, monastic rules, and the letters of popes and bishops. Many of the regulations at first paralleled those aimed at insuring the special status of the clergy, including its nonviolence, but were gradually extended to the lay population. Penances ranged from fasting on bread and water for week, paying compensation to victims in money, goods or property, exile, pilgrimage, and excommunication. Readmission to Christian community was possible only after the completion of the prescribed penance.

These manuals proved to be such a concise and effective method for conceptualizing and standardizing notions of sin and repentance that they spread from Ireland to the Continent in a wide variety of collections that became enshrined in official collections of church law by the twelfth century. The penitentials are of great value for studying early medieval notions of violence, its seriousness and its consequences in a variety of actions, circumstances, and classes of victims.

The texts assign penances for killing in wartime, even under the lawful command of legitimate authority. Penances lasting from forty days to a year for killing someone in battle, were not uncommon. Following Augustine, war was seen as inherently sinful, and at best the lesser of two evils.

The Middle Ages

Charles the Bald with Popes Gelasius I and Gregory I. From the Sacramentary of Charles the Bald (c. 870)

The Carolingian period saw the emergence of both a renewed Roman Empire of the West and the beginning of fresh barbarian invasions from the north and east and the rise of Islam. Internal efforts to legislate the life of the Christian Republic were therefore matched by its external defense against invasions by the Vikings, Magyars, and Saracens. The problems and conditions were in many ways similar to those of Christian thinkers under the late Roman Empire when the state was identified with Christian society. The Carolingian Empire thus brought a renewed militarization of society that sought to protect Christendom from external threat, while it used the hierarchical bonds of feudal oaths and vassalage to bring the new class of mobile horse warriors, the milities, to some semblance of central authority. War took on a religious dimension as evidenced by liturgical formulae for the blessings of armies and weapons.

The close identification of the Carolingian Empire with the extent of Western Christianity revived the late Roman associations of Christianitas (Christendom) with the orbis Romanus or oikoumene (the Roman world). On the most official levels Christian peace necessitated its defense against the attacks of external enemies.

Christian peace involved the monastic or ascetic peace of a pure heart and life devoted to prayer; the episcopal peace, or pax ecclesiae, of a properly functioning free and unified church; and the social or imperial peace of the world. These often overlapped.

Carolingian theory established two, separate, ecclesiastical and secular spheres of authority within Christian society, one to lead the body and one the spirit. Monastic life was supported, and encouraged; while late Roman prohibitions against clerical participation in the army were repeated again and again. Among the thinkers and writers on issues of peace and peacemaking were Alcuin of York, Smaragdus of Saint-Mihiel, Paschasius Radbertus, and Hincmar of Rheims. In keeping with their time, these offered various interpretations of peace as an inner tranquillity, legal guidelines to war and the curbing of military violence, or the image of peace as an ideal Christian state.

The Cain Adomnan

Main article: Cain Adomnan

The Cáin Adomnáin (Law of Adomnán), also known as the Lex Innocentium (Law of Innocents) was promulgated amongst a gathering of Irish, Dál Riatan and Pictish notables at the Synod of Birr in 697. It is named after its initiator Adomnán of Iona, ninth Abbot of Iona after St. Columba. As a successor of Columba of Iona, Adomnán had sufficient prestige to assemble a conference of ninety-one chieftains and clerics from Ireland, Dál Riata, and Pictland at Birr to promulgate the new law. As well as being the site of a significant monastery, associated with Saint Brendan of Birr, Birr was close to the boundary between the Uí Néill-dominated northern half of Ireland, and the southern half, where the kings of Munster ruled. It therefore represented a neutral ground where the rival kings and clerics of north and south Ireland could meet.

This set of laws was designed, among other things, to guarantee the safety and immunity of various types of non-combatants in warfare. The laws provided sanctions against the killing of children, clerics, clerical students and peasants on clerical lands; against rape, against impugning the chastity of a noblewoman, and prohibited women from having to take part in warfare. Various factors, including Marian devotion in seventh- and eighth-century Ireland, may have contributed to inspire Adomnán to introduce these laws. Many of these things were already crimes, under the Irish Brehon Laws. The law described both the secular fines which criminals must pay, and the ritual curses to which law-breakers were subject.

The indigenous Brehon Laws were committed to parchment about the seventh century, most likely by clerics. Most scholars now believe that the secular laws were not compiled independently of monasteries. Adomnan would have had access to the best legal minds of his generation. Adomnan's Cain combined aspects of the traditional Brehon laws with an ecclesiastical approach. Following Ambrose and Augustine, bystanders who did nothing to prevent a crime were as liable as the perpetrator. "Stewards of the Law" collected the fine and paid it to the victim or next of kin.

Adomnán's initiative appears to be one of the first systematic attempts to lessen the savagery of warfare among Christians. In it he gave local expression, in the context of the Gaelic legal tradition, to a wider Christian movement to restrain violence.  It was an early example of international law in that it was to be enforced in Ireland and northern Scotland, for it was the kings of those regions who were in attendance and signed as guarantors of the Law.

Peace of God

Main article: Peace and Truce of God

As Carolingian authority began to erode, especially on the outskirts of power, as in southern Gaul, the episcopate took steps to protect their congregations and their holdings against the encroachments of local nobles. The Peace of God originated in the conciliar assemblies of the late Carolingian period. It began in Aquitaine, Burgundy and Languedoc, areas where central authority had most completely fragmented.

A limited Pax Dei was decreed at the Synod of Charroux in 989 and spread to most of Western Europe over the next century, surviving in some form until at least the thirteenth century.

A great crowd of many people (populus) gathered from the Poitou, the Limousin, and neighboring regions. Relics of saints were displayed and venerated. The participation of large, enthusiastic crowds marks it as one of the first popular religious movements of the Middle Ages. In the early phase, the blend of relics and crowds, and enthusiasm stamped the movement with an exceptionally popular character.

The Peace of God or Pax Dei was a proclamation issued by local clergy that decreed immunity from armed violence to noncombatants who could not defend themselves, beginning with the peasants (agricolae) and the clergy. It included the clergy and their possessions; the poor; women; peasants along with their tools, animals, mills, vineyards, and labor; and later pilgrims and merchants: in short, the vast majority of the medieval population who neither bore arms, nor were entitled to bear them. Children and women were added to the early protections. Merchants and their goods were added to the protected groups in a synod of 1033.

The Pax Dei prohibited nobles from invading churches, beating the defenseless, and burning houses. Excommunication would be the punishment for attacking or robbing a church, for robbing peasants or the poor of farm animals and for robbing, striking or seizing a priest or any man of the clergy "who is not bearing arms". Making compensation or reparations could circumvent the anathema of the Church.

After a lull in the first two decades of the eleventh century, the movement spread to the north with the support of king Robert, the Capetian. There, the high nobility sponsored peace assemblies throughout Flanders, Burgundy, Champagne, Normandy, Amienois, and Berry. By 1041 the peace had spread throughout France and had reached Flanders and Italy. From c. 1018 the peace was extended to Catalonia and reached Barcelona, Girona, and Urgel. Assemblies were repeated all over western Europe into the 1060s.

Truce of God

The Truce of God or Treuga Dei had its origin in Normandy in the city of Caen. It dates from the eleventh century.

While the Truce of God was a temporary suspension of hostilities, as distinct from the Peace of God which was permanent, the jurisdiction of the Truce of God was broader. The Peace of God prohibited fighting on Sundays, and ferial days (feast days on which people were not obliged to work). It was the sanctification of Sunday which gave rise to the Truce of God, for it had always been agreed not to do battle on that day and to suspend disputes in the law-courts.

It confirmed permanent peace for all churches and their grounds, the monks, clerks and chattels; all women, pilgrims, merchants and their servants, cattle and horses; and men at work in the fields. For all others peace was required throughout Advent, the season of Lent, and from the beginning of the Rogation days until eight days after Pentecost. This prohibition was subsequently extended to specific days of the week, viz., Thursday, in memory of the Ascension, Friday, the day of the Passion, and Saturday, the day of the Resurrection (council 1041). By the middle of the twelfth century the number of proscribed days was extended until there was left some eighty days for fighting.

The Truce soon spread from France to Italy and Germany; the oecumenical council of 1179 extended the institution to the whole Church by Canon xxi, "De treugis servandis", which was inserted in the collection of canon law, Decretal of Gregory IX, I, tit., "De treuga et pace". Aquinas challenged the Truce, holding that it was lawful to wage war to safeguard the commonweal on holy days and feast days.

Thomas Aquinas

In his Summa Theologica, Thomas Aquinas expands Augustine's arguments to define the conditions under which a war could be just:

• War must occur for a good and just purpose rather than the pursuit of wealth or power.
• Just war must be waged by a properly instituted authority such as the state.
• Peace must be a central motive even in the midst of violence.

The Crusades

Religious thinkers and secular writers attempted to incorporate the controls of the Peace and Truce of God into the existing warrior ethic by "Christianizing" it into the Crusades and the cult of chivalry. Beginning in the eleventh century, knighthood developed a religious character. Prospective knights underwent rigorous religious rituals in order to be initiated. An initiate had to fast, confess his sins, was given a symbolic bath, had his hair cut to represent humility, and he spent a night praying, his weapons upon an altar representing the dedication of his weapons to the Church and God. Advancements in metallurgy allowed inscriptions and pictures of holy symbols to be engraved on helmets, swords, shields, and other equipment. The symbols allowed for a physical reminder to knights and military men that God was supporting their efforts, providing protection to those soldiers as well as the assurance of a victory over their enemies.

Louis IX of France is equally famous for his failed crusades and for the settlement of disputes and the maintenance of peace within Christian lands. He issued the first extant ordinance indefinitely prohibiting warfare in France, a text dating from January 1258 that outlawed guerrae omnes as well as arson, and disturbances to carts and to agricolae who work with carts or plows. Those who transgressed this prohibition were to be punished as peace-breakers (fractores pacis) by the king's officer and the bishop-elect of le Puy-en-Velay. Louis IX promulgated this text as a simple royal act on the basis of his authority as king.

St. Francis before the Sultan - the trial by fire, Giotto

Alternatives to the Crusades

Christian missionary work was presented as a viable alternative to the violence of the crusaders. Majorcan Franciscan Blessed Ramon Llull (1232-1315) argued that the conversion of Muslims should be achieved through prayer, not through military force, and pressed for the study of Arabic to prepare potential missionaries. He traveled through Europe to meet with popes, kings, and princes, trying to establish special colleges to prepare them.

Renaissance and Reformation (c. 1400 – c. 1800)

Humanism

Erasmus

Main article: Erasmus § Pacifism

Erasmus by Hans Holbein the Younger

Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam was a notable figure of the Northern Renaissance who promoted international peace within Christendom as a moral necessity, both through his books targeted at the educated elite, such as The Complaint of Peace and Education of a Christian Prince, and through his network of high-power correspondents.

He tried to hose down religious antagonism between Catholics and Lutherans. Although Erasmus did not oppose the punishment of heretics, in individual cases he generally argued for moderation and against the death penalty. He wrote, "It is better to cure a sick man than to kill him." However Erasmus warned that aggressive public heresy could provide an excuse for sedition and warfare, and forecast the bloodshed that would be unleashed with the new Lutheranism. He wrote: "When the Lutheran tragedy (Latin: Lutheranae tragoediae) opened, and all the world applauded, I advised my friends to stand aloof. I thought it would end in bloodshed"

Age of Exploration

Bartolomé de Las Casas

See also: School of Salamanca

Francisco de Vitoria was a Spanish Dominican philosopher, considered one of the founders of early international law. He was educated at the College Saint-Jacques in Paris, where he was influenced by the work of Desidarius Erasmus. In 1524, he held the Chair of theology at the University of Salamanca, where a number of missionaries returning from the New World expressed concern regarding treatment of the indigenous inhabitants. In three lectures held between 1537 and 1539 Vitoria concluded that the Indians were rightful owners of their property and that their chiefs validly exercised jurisdiction over their tribes. A supporter of the just war theory, in De iure belli Fransico pointed out that the underlying predicate conditions for a "just war" were "wholly lacking in the Indies". Vitoria adopted from Aquinas the Roman law concept of ius gentium ("the law of nations"). His defense of American Indians was based on a Scholastic understanding of the intrinsic dignity of man, a dignity he found being violated by Spain's policies in the New World.

Dominican friar Pedro de Córdoba OP (c. 1460–1525) was a Spanish missionary on the island of Hispaniola. He was first to denounce the system of forced labor known as the Encomienda, imposed on the native inhabitants.

Other important figures include Bartolomé de Las Casas and Peter of Saint Joseph Betancur

Catholic Universalism

Émeric Crucé was a French monk who took the position that wars were the result of international misunderstandings and the domination of society by the warrior class, both of which could be reduced through commerce, as that brought people together. The genesis of the idea of a meeting of representatives of different nations to obtain by peaceful arbitration a settlement of differences has been traced to Crucé's 1623 work entitled The New Cyneas, a discourse showing the opportunities and the means for establishing a general peace and liberty of conscience to all the world, addressed to the monarch and the sovereign princes of the time. He proposed that a city, preferably Venice, should be selected where all the Powers had ambassadors including all peoples.

Modern Church (to c. 1945)

Kulturkampf

From 1871 to 1878, Chancellor Bismarck, who controlled both the German Empire and the Kingdom of Prussia, launched the "Kulturkampf" in Prussia to reduce the power of the Catholic Church in public affairs, and keep Polish Catholics under control. Thousands of priests and bishops were harassed or imprisoned, with large fines and closures of Catholic churches and schools. German was declared to be the only official language, but in practice the Poles only adhered more closely to their traditions. Catholics were angry at his systematic attacks. Unanimous in their resistance, they organized themselves to fight back politically, using their strength in other states such as Catholic Bavaria. There was little or no violence, and the new Roman Catholic Center Party won a quarter of the seats in the Reichstag (Imperial Parliament), and its middle position on most issues allowed it to play a decisive role in the formation of majorities. The culture war gave secularists and socialists an opportunity to attack all religions, an outcome that distressed the Protestants, including Bismarck. After the death of Pope Pius IX in 1878 Bismarck opened negotiations with Pope Leo XIII, which led to his gradual abandonment of the Kulturkampf in the early 1880s.

Caritas

The first Caritas organisation was established by Lorenz Worthmann 9 November 1897 in Germany. Other national Caritas organisations were soon formed in Switzerland (1901) and the United States (Catholic Charities, 1910). It has since grown into "Caritas Internationalis", a confederation of 165 Roman Catholic relief, development and social service organizations operating in over 200 countries and territories worldwide.

Caritas Australia is involved in peacebuilding and reconciliation programs in Sri Lanka, The Philippines, Papua New Guinea and elsewhere, including Movimento de Defesa do Fevelado (MDF) which trains youth to be peacebuilders in São Paulo, Brazil in response to an increasing number of children becoming involved in drugs, organised crime and murders. It is hoped these trainees will become the next generation of leaders in their communities.

In an effort to overcome many prejudices and fears between different nationalities, ethnic and religious groups. The Salzburg branch of Caritas Osterreich sponsors a Peace Camp for unprivileged children of different religious denominations from all over the Middle East. The camp takes place in a different country in the region each year. Since 1999 almost 900 children and youths from nine different countries and eighteen different religious denominations have participated in the program.

Fascism and Nazism

See also: Catholic resistance to Nazism

Bishop Konrad von Preysing was one of the most firm and consistent of senior Catholics to oppose the Nazis. He and Bishop Clemens August Graf von Galen, along with Cardinal Secretary of State Eugenio Pacelli, were part of a committee that drafted the 1937 encyclical Mit brennender Sorge which warned Catholics that the growing Nazi ideology, which exalted one race over all others, was incompatible with Catholic Christianity.

Austrian Bishop Gfoellner of Linz had the encyclical read from the pulpits of his diocese. Bishop Gfoellner indicated that the dangers of German Catholics were also the dangers of Austrian Catholics: "What I wrote in my pastoral of January 21, 1933. 'It is impossible to be at once a good Catholic and a good National-Socialist,' is confirmed today." The release of Mit brennender Sorge precipitated an intensification of the Nazi persecution of the Catholic Church in Germany. With the death of Cathedral Provost Bernhard Lichtenberg while en route to Dachau, Margarete Sommer took over supervising the work of Preysing's Welfare Office. Sommer coordinated Catholic aid for victims of racial persecution – giving spiritual comfort, food, clothing, and money. She gathered intelligence on the deportations of the Jews, and living conditions in concentration camps, as well as on SS firing squads, writing several reports on these topics from 1942.

Belgian Cardinal Jozef-Ernest van Roey was deeply opposed to Nazi Germany, and once said, "With Germany we step many degrees downward and reach the lowest possible depths. We have a duty of conscience to combat and to strive for the defeat of these dangers ... Reason and good sense both direct us towards confidence, towards resistance". Cardinal van Roey intervened with the authorities to rescue Jews from the Nazis, and encouraged various institutions to aid Jewish children. One of his acts of rescue was to open a geriatric centre in which Jews were housed, at which kosher Jewish cooks would be required who could therefore be given special passes protecting them from deportation. Papal Nuncio Angelo Roncalli used diplomatic couriers, papal representatives and the Sisters of Our Lady of Zion to transport and issue baptismal certificates, immigration certificates and visas – many of them forged – to Hungarian Jews.

Pallottine priest Franz Reinisch was beheaded SAC for refusing to take the oath of allegiance to Hitler. When his offer to serve as a medic was denied, Franciscan tertiary Franz Jaegerstatter was executed as a conscientious objector. Both encountered clergy who thought that they failed in their duty to their country.

Contemporary Catholicism (c. 1963 – present)

Opening ceremony for Vatican II

Europe

Pope John XXIII (1958–63) set off a revolution in Roman Catholic thought and life that harkened back to an earlier period for its models and inspiration and brought the church into a new age. Through his policy of aggiornamento the pope opened the church to the modern world. Russell Hittinger describes the encyclical Pacem in Terris "as a kind of magna charta of the Catholic Church's position on human rights and natural law". John's successors Paul VI and John Paul II furthered this agenda while maintaining traditional church teachings in many areas of individual and social morality.

In the 1980s the Polish Solidarity movement grew out of labor strikes in the shipyard at Gdańsk. It was the first non-Communist Party-controlled trade union in a Warsaw Pact country, and became a broad social movement, using civil resistance to advance the causes of workers' rights and social change.

British historian Timothy Garton Ash, observed shortly after Pope John Paul II's death: "without the Polish Pope, no Solidarity revolution in Poland in 1980; without Solidarity, no dramatic change in Soviet policy towards eastern Europe under Gorbachev; without that change, no velvet revolutions in 1989."

The Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo with Néstor Kirchner, president of Argentina, in 2005.

Latin America

Under the guidance of Archbishop Hélder Câmara, the Catholic church in Brazil became an outspoken critic of the 1964-85 military dictatorship and a powerful movement for social change.

Léonie Duquet and Alice Domon were French religious sisters abducted in December 1977 by an Argentine death squad for their support of the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo in their efforts to learn the fate of those disappeared by the then ruling military regime. Later that month a number of bodies washed ashore south of Buenos Aires and were subsequently secretly buried. Duquet was among those later disinterred and identified.

In El Salvador, Father Rutilio Grande spoke against the injustices at the hands of an oppressive government, and dedicated his life's work to organizing the impoverished, marginalized rural farmers of El Salvador as they demanded respect for their rights. Father Grande and two others were killed by machine gun fire, while on the way to say Mass.

Africa

Denis Hurley O.M.I. was the South African Roman Catholic Archbishop of Durban. Hurley was among the first church leaders to denounce apartheid, condemning the policy as an affront to human dignity. In the late 1970s Hurley held a daily silent protest, standing in front of the central Durban Post Office for a period each day with a placard expressing his opposition to apartheid and the displacement of people from their homes. He received many death threats and was at times subject to house arrest. According to Gerald Shaw writing for The Guardian, "It was in part due to his sustained moral crusade and that of other churchmen that the transition to democracy, when it came in 1994, was accepted by white people in peace and good order." Hurley is remembered for his contribution to the struggle against apartheid, his concern for the poor and his commitment towards a more just and peaceful society.

Asia

Jaime Sin was the Cardinal Archbishop of Manila, who "played a key role in the Philippines' transition to democracy following the lengthy dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos. The Associated Press called Sin "the Philippines' moral compass". Beyond its effects on the Philippines, the peaceful ouster of Marcos has been cited as a milestone in the movement toward popularly chosen governments throughout the world.

United States

During World War I, Ben Salmon was a conscientious objector and outspoken critic of Just War theology. The US military charged him with desertion and spreading propaganda, then sentenced him to death, a sentence later commuted to twenty-five years hard labor.

During World War II, Out of a total of 21 million Catholics only 223 claimed IV-E CO status, conscientious objection to military service; 135 were eventually classified. Most Catholic objectors chose I-A-O status, noncombatant military service, generally as unarmed medics on the front lines. In addition to these 135 Catholic conscientious objectors, 61 Catholics refused induction and were imprisoned.

Initially founded as the War Relief Services, the original purpose of Catholic Relief Services was to aid the refugees of war-torn Europe. The continuing support of the American Catholic helped CRS expand operations and in 1955 its name was officially changed to Catholic Relief Services. Over time the agency learned that to supply emergency aid without addressing the underlying problems might prolong conflict by providing new resources to the warring parties. In light of that, CRS has re-evaluated how best to focus their activities. In some countries CRS works on providing peace education for children in refugee camps or improving relations between refugees and local inhabitants. It works in ninety-three countries in programs that address hunger, the provision of clean water, and health issues.

Dorothy Day in 1934.

After the war Catholic peacemaking narrowed down to a very few institutions, including the Catholic Worker Movement, and individuals, including Dorothy Day, Ammon Hennacy, and Thomas Merton. After the war, activities were carried on by such individuals as Joseph Fahey and Eileen Egan who were instrumental in the creation of Pax Christi.

Papal diplomacy and arbitration

The institutional church, and especially the papacy, long sought to use its authority to promote peace and justice, and like all human institutions, has met with mixed results. The first was primarily in the area of international diplomacy; the second was the realm of canon law and of theology, in attempts to define the limits of war and violence; and the third, among the Scholastics who investigated the boundaries of individual conscience.

For Medieval Europe, canon law served as a code of international law. According to Garret Mattingly,

since the eleventh century, the canonists had been pre-occupied with many of the problems which we think of as belonging to public international law, with the definition of sovereignty, with the sanctity of treaties, with the preservation of peace, with the rights of neutrals and noncombatants, and with the mitigation of the rigours of war.

In the thirteenth century the Papacy became the first Western power to make a systematic use of diplomacy. The papacy, in fact, can be regarded as the originator of many of the most basic elements of modern diplomacy and international law: the protection and safe conduct of ambassadors, the secrecy of diplomatic negotiations, the insistence that treaties and their terms, once made, are to be strictly adhered to, the condemnation of violations, provisions for the release of prisoners and hostages and their humane treatment while in detention, the protection of exiles, aliens, and racial minorities, and the condemnation of unjust wars all derive from the papal position both as the leader of Christian society and as a force for international unity among secular states.

The papacy's association of peace with justice that motivated its active arbitration in international relations also prompted its interest in another area associated with justice, that of jus or law. In the international sphere this brought the papacy to adopt the ancient Roman theories of the jus gentium, a body of custom and agreements among peoples and sovereign princes, from the tenth century linked with the revival of Roman law in Italy. Closely associated with Roman law and custom was the notion of the just war, which was Christianized by St. Augustine and handed on to the Middle Ages through St. Isidore of Seville.

• Pope Nicholas I (858-67) against the backdrop of Carolingian conquest Nicholas penned what is both a "classic summary of Christian faith and discipline" and a harsh condemnation of war. In his Reply to the Inquiry of the Bulgars, written in 866, Nicholas condemns conversion by force, branding war as a diabolical fraud. Nicholas concedes that war may be permissible in cases of inescapable necessity, but such cases are only deemed to be the "defence of not only yourself but also your country and the laws of your fathers". He advises that deserters (c. 22) and those who refuse to obey orders to kill (c. 23) be treated leniently and gives Boris examples of numerous martyrs who fled in the face of violence. In response to Boris' question as to how Christians are to prepare for war, Nicholas answered that one must employ all the Christian works of mercy that make peace, affirm life, and negate the motives for and works of war.
• During the tenure of Pope Pius IX, Catholics and Protestants collaborated to found a school in Rome to study international law and train international mediators committed to conflict resolution.
• In 1885 Pope Leo XIII was asked by Spain and Germany to mediate their territorial dispute in the South Pacific.
• Pope Benedict XV left a legacy of lasting significance for the papacy and the church in the area of teaching and practice on war and peace. In condemning World War I as a whole without taking sides, the pope did not reason in terms of traditional church teaching about just and unjust wars. He was able to see that modern technology — especially the novelty of aerial bombardment — had made traditional moral calculations and distinctions between combatants and noncombatants increasingly meaningless. Pope Benedict's influence on his successors is clear in Pope Pius XII's attempts to use diplomacy to forestall World War II.
• Pope John XXIII made Vatican diplomatic resources available in 1962 to the United States and Russia, during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Over the course of two days, messages was sent between the White House and the Kremlin, with the Vatican serving as the intermediary. The pope's "decisive intervention", as the Associated Press later described it, helped avert nuclear war, in allowing Krushchev to save face and not look weak by being the reasonable leader who kept the peace by removing the missiles from Cuba.
• Pope John Paul II launched the interreligious prayer for peace gatherings in Assisi in 1986.
• On June 8, 2014 Pope Francis welcoming the Israeli and Palestinian presidents to the Vatican for an evening of peace prayers just weeks after the last round of U.S.-sponsored negotiations collapsed.