Using the Social Statement in Your Congregation
Christian Approaches to War
Handout #3

Historically, Christian approaches to the issue of war have fallen into three categories: holy war or crusade, pacifism and just war. The crusade approach is based on the conviction that God sanctions war when the enemy represents great evil. A crusade war is therefore viewed as a struggle between good and evil, and in the pursuit of total conquest, any means may be justifiable. This approach to war is viewed by the ELCA and most Christian churches as incompatible with Christian teaching.

For Peace in God’s World continues the historic Lutheran perspective on justifiable war though it acknowledges the concerns about its viability in the modern age. The statement raises up the important witness of pacifists in the church today. Just war doctrine and pacifism are complex but the following chart seeks to make some rudimentary comparisons between the two approaches.

Just War and Pacifism: Contrasting Approaches to War
(Source: War: A Primer for Christians by Joseph L. Allen, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1991. Allen offers a concise description of the just war teaching as well as other options Christians have followed.)

Theological/Biblical Basis
Just War: God’s creation is beset by persisting and often destructive conflicts in human life. It is wrong to kill to save one’s own life; it is our duty to act to help other people.

Pacifism: Jesus teaching, life and death show us the way of Christian love. In particular, Jesus instructed his followers not to resist an evildoer (Mt. 5:39) and to love their enemies (Mt. 5:44).

Historical Notes
Just War: A doctrine developed by Ambrose and Augustine in the late fourth and early fifth century after the Roman Empire had become officially Christian and faced external threats. The criteria for justifiable war were further developed by Thomas Aquinas and others in the late Middle Ages.

Pacifism: Pacifism was the predominant position of the Christian church until 312 CE and the end of Roman persecution of Christians. Since then, pacifism has persisted as a distinctive strand in Christian ethics, within Roman Catholicism and within the Protestant tradition in the historic peace churches (e.g., Quakers, Mennonites) as well as in other denominations.

Core Convictions Held in Common
All people are of worth in God’s sight, including our enemies. A Christian approach to the issue of war must be guided by our understanding of Christian love and the duty placed upon us by such love. The presumption in a conflict situation is always that disputes should be settled peaceably.

Core Convictions That Are Different
Just War: Wars may be justifiable if they are fought by a rightly constituted authority for the purpose of protecting people and restoring a just and peaceful order in society. Such wars must meet certain criteria (see below), precluding revenge and requiring mercy to the defeated.

Pacifism: War cannot be an expression of Christian love and is incompatible with being a follower of Jesus. "Pragmatic" pacifists emphasize that nonviolence achieves better results than violence in conflict situations. "Witness" pacifists insist that Christian refusal to use power violently is a required witness to the love of Jesus Christ.

Critique
Just War: The just war criteria are applied infrequently prior to war and are used as a rationalization for government action. The just war criteria can no longer be met because of the destructiveness of modern weaponry.

Pacifism: "Pragmatic" pacifists do not recognize the depth of human sin. "Witness" pacifists have defined what constitutes Christian love too narrowly; they do not engage in the give and take of politics concerning war and peace.

Just War Criteria
Criteria for resorting to warfare are:

1. Justifiable Cause
Justifiable causes are to protect people from unjust attack, to restore rights that have been wrongly taken away, and to defend or reestablish a just political order.

2. Legitimate Authority
Decisions to employ military measures must be made by those who have legitimate authority in a nation or the international community.

3. Last Resort
Before resorting to war, all peaceful alternatives must first be exhausted.

4. Declaration of War Aims
Those who decide to use military force must make known what their proposed action is meant to accomplish.

5. Proportionality
Is the probable good to be attained and evil avoided greater than the anticipated evil effects of military action or inaction? A reasonable calculation of probably consequences must be made.

6. Reasonable Chance of Success
A case must be made that the military means chosen will likely accomplish the stated aims. The use of military force should never be a futile act.

7. Right Intention
War must not be waged for reasons of hate or revenge. War should never be an end in itself, but a means to bring a just peace.

Just war criteria for conducting war are:
1. The Principle of Discrimination
This principle prohibits direct and intentional attacks on noncombatants.

2. Proportionality
Within the limits set by the principle of discrimination, military action must be conducted so that objectives are achieved by the least destructive means possible.

In considering the possibility of revolution in situations of structured injustice, some Christians use a version of the just war criteria. The criterion of "legitimate authority" is interpreted to refer to an organization that convincingly represents the people.

Next section