Just War Theory And The Roman Catholic Church

According to James Pattison, just war theory covers many conditions and splits itself into two categories: one of them is jus ad bellum, which

Christianity and Acceptance of Conventional and Nuclear War Conventional war and nuclear war are different from others, but some Christians believe that both can take place while other Christians find nuclear war unacceptable but Conventional war is, I will explore this in detail. Some Christians think Conventional and nuclear war is acceptable because they are similar to each other in certain ways, although conventional wars do not consist of use of nuclear weapons while nuclear wars do, both kinds of wars can cause death of innocent people, both are more of government's decision rather than the citizen's, and they do not always solve the problem. An example of the similar effects of both

INTRO - In 1095 Pope Urban II made a speech at Clermont in the South of France, to mount the first crusade to rescue the Holy Land of Jerusalem from the Muslims and to give it back to the Christians. Religious obligation and personal gain would be the most important benefits from the crusades.

The Just war theory maintains that war may be justified if fought only in certain circumstances, and only if certain restrictions are applied to the way in which war is fought. The theory that was first propounded by St Augustine of Hippo and St Ambrose of Milan ( 4th and 5th centuries AD) attempts to clarify two fundamental questions: ‘when is it right to fight?’ and ‘How should war be fought?’. Whereas Pacifists are people mainly Christians who reject the use of violence and the deliberate killing of civilians but claims that peace is intrinsically good and ought to be upheld either as a duty and that war can never be justifiable. However, Realists agree that, due to the

The legitimate defense of a nation and the responsibility of the Security Council to take actions in the course of maintaining peace within its areas of influence. With the establishment of United Nations and the modernization of war and its materials; the theories and doctrines of the past also needed to evolve. The modern Just war theory in composed of two principles: jus ad bellum, the right to conduct war, and jus in bello, the correct conduct within war. Each principle also has its own set of criteria to follow. Jus ad bellum contains six: Just cause, right intention, proper authority and public declaration, last resort, probability of success, and proportionality. (Orend, 2006)

St. Augustine provided comments on morality of war from the Christian point of view (railing against the love of violence that war can engender) as did several critics in the intellectual flourishing from the 9th to 12th centuries. Just war theorists remind warriors and politicians alike that the principles of justice following war should be universalizable and morally ordered and that winning should not provide a license for imposing unduly harsh or punitive measures or that state or commercial interests should not dictate the form of new peace. “The attraction for jus post bellum thinkers is to return to the initial justice of the war”. This means that war is considered as self-defense.

Ch 13 Outline Protestants, Catholics and the Wars of Religion I. Personalities A. The Increasing Radicalization of the Movement 1. Ulrich Zwingli—1448-1531 a. Supported by guilds in Switzerland.

The just war theory deals with the justification that war is morally admissible. The just war theory attempt to conceive of how the use of armed forces can be more humane to establish lasting peace and justice. In recent wars, the United States has turn to God for guidance and strength in the war on terrorism. The Catholic Church wants to renounce the “just war’ doctrine because it is inconsistent with peace and nonviolence. The United States has not been committed to the existence of mass destruction with grave violations of mass violence during World War II. The law of double-effect undertake the actions of good and evil to meet the requirements of the

According to traditional just war theory, a just cause must serve peace and not simply protect an unjust status quo. War must be used as a last resort and all pacifistic approaches must be

If the President planned to start a new war against ISIS for the attacks on American embassies in Iraq, Egypt, Jordan, and Libya, that war would be justifiable on moral grounds. Using Just War Theory, jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum, I can show that this war would be just in that it is for the defense of American citizens, the main goal is to rid Iraq of terrorist and to end the civil war in Syria, and after the war to prevent these nations from becoming terrorist sanctuaries in the future. Some perspectives such as pacifism would disagree with this view though. From lecture 12.2 War and Just War we know that the pacifism perspective denies that war is ever right morally, while the realism and idealism perspective argue that you shouldn’t think about the moral justifications of war and that war is morally just in some cases. From lecture 12.2 and from lecture slides 12, jus ad bellum is the justification for the issuing of a war.

Aquinas’ theories surrounding the conditions for a just war evolved after the period of Saint Augustine, thereby drawing inspiration from his philosophies. In order for just war to be declared, Aquinas focused on three specific circumstances that were derived from a central theme that human choice was the ultimate decider and buffer between right and wrong.

The Just War Theory is a doctrine founded by Saint Augustine which has helped bring much discussion and debate to wars and the morality to fight in them. Wars and fights between people have gone on forever and are not perceived to stop anytime soon so it is important that some people thought about when and why they should ever fight. For many years Christians never part toke in this fighting due to teachings of the Bible and Jesus' teaching on 'turning the other cheek' and 'live by the sword, die by the sword'. Saint Augustine would be one of the first to talk about how a Christian could be a soldier and serve God at the same time. Through this thought we would receive the Just War Theory which gave a set of requirements for someone to partake

Orend while criticizing theorists Just War Theory as international law, as referred vaguely to the transition from war to peace. He also criticizes that there is no precise definition of how justice will be done after the conflict. Orend recognizes that the Jus Post Bellum is one of the "hottest spots in the Theory of Just War." Since most theorists understand that if it meets the first two principles of Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bellum could justify a conflict however Oren shows that conceptually and historically should remedy the terms of post-conflict, with the following points, which Orend (P. 160) lists:

Jus in Bello falls between two broad categories of discrimination and proportionality. Discrimination and proportionality are key factors that must be considered when engaging in war. For example, Michael Walzer argues, “war should only occur between combatants – soldier to soldier and noncombatants should be shielded from harm”. 2 Essentially, this means during times of conflict only legitimate targets should be targeted, combatants should distinguish against whom is attacked and should not include innocent bystanders. Furthermore, Alexander Moseley states, “In waging war, it is considered unfair and unjust to attack indiscriminately since non-combatants or innocents are deemed to stand outside the field of war”. 3 Unfortunately, this can be difficult at times since it may be hard to distinguish a combatant from a non-combatant especially since they do not always wear a uniform or carry arms, making it impossible to distinguish between them.

Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, and Jus Post Bellum are the three stages of Just War Theory. Jus ad Bellum pertains to the ethics of starting a just war, with the principles being having just cause, being a last resort, being declared by a proper authority, possessing right intention, having a reasonable chance of success, and the end being proportional to the means used. Jus in Bello covers the conduct of individuals at war, with discrimination and proportionality being the guidelines. Meaning, only use force against legitimate targets in war, and only use an amount of force that is morally appropriate. Jus Post Bellum discusses how justice should be served following the cessation of a war, with discrimination being a big