Just War Vs. Pacifism

Just-War versus Pacifism

Over the years Christians have split into two theories over the issue of war: Pacifism and Just War. The pacifistic Christians believe that there should be no war and fighting in any situation, while those who believe in just war argue that war is right if it is in defense of people who need help. With the peaceful teachings of Christ, it is easy to see where the Pacifists find their ideals, but would Jesus think it was wrong to fight for the millions being killed by unjust rulers?

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines pacifism as an "opposition to war or violence as a means of settling disputes; specifically a refusal to bear arms on moral or religious ground." ("Pacifism") The pacifism movement supports completely peaceful relations in all circumstances. The pacifistic movement has been strong in Christian history, particularly in groups such as the Quakers. The Theory of Just-War on the other hand did not stem from Christianity originally. It was first mentioned by Aristotle who was teaching against war societies such as Sparta. He defined just war as a war with an end goal such a peace and prosperity.(Bell 17) Typically speaking Just War theorist are have harsher criteria and see war as a last resort, more along the lines of Cicero's thinking. He defined Just War as "a war fought for the sake of self-defense or to right wrongs which have been done."(Bell 17)

Pacifistic beliefs lie in the teaching of Christ which clearly preaches peace. Possibly the most well known of these is His "turn the other cheek" teaching. Jesus says, "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."(NIV,Matthew 5: 38-39). This type of submission to other would be viewed as weakness and cowardice in today's society. Pacifists take this teaching literally and refuse to participate in any activity that would be considered "hitting back". By believing that no violent measures should be taken Pacifist are denying the honor that has been given to the troops who have fought for their freedom for centuries and the glory that has been given to the war heroes since the beginning of time. Because of war's strong presence in history and our society, the idea of pacifism being the commands of Christ is instantly rejected by many of us. But what if it was Christ's intention? He consistently teaches that he is the one who is to take care of our enemies. Rather than handling them ourselves, we are supposed to love them. "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, "(Matthew 5:43-44). In addition, Romans 12:19 Jesus says "Vengeance is mine." God says that he is in control and that we should not take revenge for ourselves. The hard part comes in defining the fine line between doing what is right and taking revenge into our own hands.

"The Lord is a warrior, the Lord is His name."(Exodus 15:3) The God of the Old testament was certainly no against war. He orchestrated wars; King David even said that the Lord trained his hands for battle. (Psalms 144:1) Many pacifistic Christian's argued that this was a different time and that God's standards changed with the teachings of Jesus. "So He made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables," (John 2:14-15). This passage does not seem to be describing a strict pacifist. In these verses, Jesus is shown to be standing up against something that is wrong, in a generally violent manner. This is where just war seems to be defended by the scriptures. Jesus saw something wrong and took action to fix the problem. Should Christians not follow this example? Jesus says,

"Then I will turn to those on my left and say, 'Away with you, you cursed ones, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his demons. For I was hungry and you wouldn't