Friday, August 5, 2022

The Case for Self-defense

 


Exodus 20 The command is given thou shall not kill and then moves on without any context of who or what you shall not kill. The pacifists point out that it is to not kill people period. Without any extra input to this verse to the sola scripturaist the conclusion should really include animals and plants too. Is that really what the intention of the command was? No, but it makes you think. If you need the entire scripture to show it isn’t talking about plants and animals, then maybe you need the same criteria to see if it is talking about people period or if certain circumstances are required. The 10 commandments are sins that are considered intrinsically evil meaning they are wrong every time no matter what. Would God command you to sin? The obvious answer is no. It is like having a square circle. It is a logical contradiction that cannot exist. So what do we find the next chapter Ex 21? We see God commanding them to put people to death 5 times and a total of 9 times in the book. Let’s look at some of them. Ex 21:12 if a person strikes someone and they die they shall be put to death however if it was an accident then God will appoint a place for the person to flee to avoid being killed by the victim’s family. We see in this example that the word translated kill in Ex20 should really be murder for God just explained intentional killing is a crime permitting death while an accident which is not murder, the person may be free from punishment. In Mt 19:18 the rich young ruler asks Jesus what he must do to obtain eternal life and Jesus replies keep the commandments. He then starts to list some of the 10 commandments in which he says you shall no murder further demonstrating that Ex 20 should say murder and not kill.

In Galatians 3:6 It talks about Abraham’s faith and it was credited to him as righteousness. In Psalms 106:30-30 it recalls a story about Phinehas that is back in Numbers 25:6-10. In this story Israelite men were sleeping with worshipers of Baal. The command went out from God to kill these people to prevent the worship of false Gods among the Israelites. Phinehas stabs a man and women and stops the plague. God personally tell Moses that He has given him His covenant of peace and will be with him and his descendants. The verse in Psalms says that this act was credited to him as righteousness using the same phrasing that Gal 3 uses concerning Abraham’s faith.

Numerous times in the Old Testament God fights with the Israelites against their enemies in war. Again reiterating that God would not sin nor tell you to sin.

Neh 4:17-18 Is an example of self-defense. It describes how the people were building the wall around Jerusalem and how they always had their sword on them even to say work with one hand and hold their weapon in the other.

Even under Persian occupation in Esther 8:11 with the help of Esther the king allowed the Jews to defend themselves against any attacker.

What about the new testament? In Lk 12:39 it says if the good man of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through. This verse shows the legitimate defense of property.

In Lk 3:10-14 people are asking what should they do to be saved. The tax collectors, John the Baptist tells them to not take more than the prescribed amount. For the soldiers he told them to not extort money and be happy with their wages. He does not tell them that their job is intrinsically evil like that of a pirate or assassin showing that legitimate civil defense is okay.

In Lk 7:1-10 Jesus encounters a centurion whose servant is sick. Jesus wants to go with him to heal him but the centurion says just say the word and he will be healed. Jesus then commends the servant for having such a strong faith unseen in all of Israel. You can see that the Centurion in his current profession had a strong faith. It was not after he met Jesus and had a conversion and had to leave his job. Jesus says he had great faith while in his job and did not say he needed to change it.

In Acts 10 is the story about Cornelius the centurion. While he is a centurion he prays and gives alms. One day an angel appears to him and has him send for Peter. Peter in a vision of his own at the time Cornelius’ men arrive hears the Holy Spirit tell him to go with them. When they get back to Cornelius he is baptized and the people who are with them are amazed at the outpouring of the Spirit. Again it is important to note that these events took place because Cornelius was a God fearing man while he was in his profession as a centurion. There is not mention that he felt the need to quit after receiving baptism.

What would Jesus do? Jesus himself is called Lord of Hosts which means he is a commander of armies. In Jn 18:36 Jesus tells Pilot that his kingship is not of this world, if it was his servants would fight to stop Jesus being turned over to death.  This verse while may look like a verse showing no fighting in this world what it actually shows is that fighting in a war is not intrinsically evil otherwise Jesus would not say they would fight had circumstances be different.

Theologians J. P. Moreland and Norman Geisler say that “to permit murder when one could have prevented it is morally wrong. To allow a rape when one could have hindered it is evil. To watch an act of cruelty to children without trying to intervene is morally inexcusable. In brief, not resisting evil is an evil of omission, and an evil of omission can be just as evil as an evil of commission. Any man who refuses to protect his wife and children against a violent intruder fails them morally.”

What about loving our enemies? Which is the more loving act? To defend one’s family (or any group of people) by killing a depraved person intent on killing the entire group? Or by “loving” the aggressor and allowing him to kill unchecked, thus taking the lives of many others? No, in these cases the most loving thing to do is to stop the attack by any means possible or necessary, even if that means taking the perpetrator’s life.

Why is it we see a lot of examples in the Old Testament about fighting in war and capital punishment but so little in the New Testament? In the Old Testament they were a nation of people. God gave them a code of conduct to run society similar to what we have today such as if there is a crime there is a punishment. As a nation they had enemies that would like to see them dead and they had to defend themselves. In the New Testament the nation had long since been conquered and they were living under the jurisdiction of the Romans. Under the Romans you had a different code of conduct similar as today just being enforced by Romans instead of a Christian one. Christian persecution started immediately and it was like that for 300 years until Christianity was legally allowed to be practiced. That is why you don’t see a Christian society in the New testament with its own law enforcement or means of self defense. If you were a Christian and a roman soldier hit you what should you do? Defend yourself and have a dozen more soldiers come and kill you or should you turn the other cheek? It turns out that the phrase is a Hebrew idiom refereeing to an insult. It was an insult to be hit across the face to the Jew so this teaching is not really about not defending yourself but to not retaliate will insults back. There is a time for defending yourself but under Roman occupation was not one of them. After the legalization of Christianity they had to start thinking about what is our place with self defense and military use. This is where the Just War doctrine was developed by St Augustine.

These are the conditions that have to be met in order for a war to be considered Just.

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

In addition to the conditions before war there are conditions that need to be met during war:

The Church and human reason both assert the permanent validity of the moral law during armed conflict. "The mere fact that war has regrettably broken out does not mean that everything becomes licit between the warring parties."

  • Non-combatants, wounded soldiers, and prisoners must be respected and treated humanely.
  • Actions deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes, as are the orders that command such actions. Blind obedience does not suffice to excuse those who carry them out. Thus the extermination of a people, nation, or ethnic minority must be condemned as a mortal sin. One is morally bound to resist orders that command genocide.
  • "Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation." A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons—especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons—to commit such crimes.

Just war doctrine is like the doctrine of the Trinity. It was believed early on but for the Trinity it was not formally defined until the Council of Nicea in 325ad. Why was it defined so late? The reason was there was a heretic named Arius who believed Jesus was a powerful creature but not God. His heresy was leading many astray so they had to meet together in council to define what they believed. This is following the example that we find in Acts 15. In this chapter people were saying that new converts needed to follow the mosaic law. This caused much division so they called the first ecumenical council, the Council of Jerusalem, to work out this problem. Peter was given a special office apart from the other apostles in Matt 16:18-19 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." He was given the keys to kingdom which is also explained in the Old Testament. Is 22:22 The key of the house of David I will lay on his shoulder; So he shall open, and no one shall shut; And he shall shut, and no one shall open. Isaiah 9:6-7 and Lk 1:32 says that Jesus will sit on the throne of David and his reign will be forever. So just like in David’s kingdom, Jesus has someone in charge of the keys. Is 22:21 says that he will be a father to the nation. The term pope comes from the word papa or father. In Acts 15 Peter makes the declaration that they do not have to follow the mosaic law and then James the bishop Jerusalem gives pastoral advice in addition to that. Then they send legates out to the Church in whole world with the decree binding all the faithful. This is the kind of authority Jesus gave to the apostles and their successors the bishops who can trace their ordination back to the apostles. The Scared scripture is just one leg of the 3 legged stool that Jesus gave us. He also gave us sacred tradition. 2 Thess 2:15 “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.” We don’t have to reinvent the wheel every time something comes up. We can look at scripture and we can look at what was practiced and believed that was passed down through history and we have a Church authority who can give certitude to the truth.

We can see in Church history beyond the New Testament, the Church that Jesus founded, The Catholic Church has been speaking about these issues from very early on as seen in the following quotes from the Early Church Fathers below. It is not until the founding Anabaptist religion did all out pacifism become a mainstay.

 

Tertullian to Scapula ch 4 (160-240 ad)

Marcus Aurelius also, in his expedition to Germany, by the prayers his Christian soldiers offered to God, got rain in that well-known thirst

Athanasius Letter 48 (296-373 ad)

For in other matters also which go to make up life, we shall find differences according to circumstances. For example, it is not right to kill, yet in war it is lawful and praiseworthy to destroy the enemy; accordingly, not only are they who have distinguished themselves in the field held worthy of great honours, but monuments are put up proclaiming their achievements. So that the same act is at one time and under some circumstances unlawful, while under others,

and at the right time, it is lawful and permissible.

Basil Letter 106 (329-379 ad)

I have learnt to know one who proves that even in a soldier's life it is possible to preserve the perfection of love to God, and that we must mark a Christian not by the style of his dress, but by the disposition of his soul.

Basil Letter 155 (329-379 ad)

To forget you in my prayers is impossible, unless first I forget the work to which God has called me, for assuredly, faithful as by God's grace you are, you remember all the prayers of the Church; how we pray also for our brethren when on a journey and offer prayer in the holy church for those who are in the army, and for those who speak for the sake of the Lord's name, and for those who show the fruits of the Spirit.

John Chrysostom Homily 5 on First Thessalonians (347-407 ad)

When thy son is grown up, before he enters upon warfare, or any other course of life, consider of his marriage.

Augustine Reply to Faustus the Manichean Book 22 pa 74 (354-430 ad)

The real evils in war are love of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and implacable enmity, wild resistance, and the lust of power, and such like; and it is generally to punish these things, when force is required to inflict the punishment, that, in obedience to God or some lawful authority, good men undertake wars, when they find themselves in such a position as regards the conduct of human affairs, that right conduct requires them to act, or to make others act in this way. Otherwise John, when the soldiers who came to be baptized asked, What shall we do? would have replied, Throw away your arms; give up the service; never strike, or wound, or disable any one. But knowing that such actions in battle were not murderous but authorized by law, and that the soldiers did not thus avenge themselves, but defend the public safety, he replied, "Do violence to no man, accuse no man falsely, and be content with your wages."

Sozomen Ecclesial History Book 6 Ch 3 (375-477 ad)

but when the soldiers discovered the cause of his refusal, they loudly proclaimed that they were themselves Christians.

Leo the Great Letters 167 question 14 (395-461 ad)

For that which a man has vowed to GOD, he ought also to pay. Hence he who abandons his profession of a single life and betakes himself to military service or to marriage, must make atonement and clear himself publicly, because although such service may be innocent and the married state honourable, it is transgression to have forsaken the higher choice.

Apostolic Constitutions book 7 par 2 (400ad)

Not as if all killing were wicked, but only that of the innocent: but the killing which is just is reserved to the magistrates alone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No comments: