What can we learn from the ethical tradition of the Church concerning war?

  V   What can we learn from the ethic tradition of the church?
    1. The  basis of Christian ethic
While the Christians in the two first centuries were pacifists, we later on got Christians that used military force to promote Christianity. The position of the church in society seems to have influenced the ethic of war. The Bible has not been the sole source of the so called Christian viewpoint on a "just war". We need a Kingdom ethic and we need to look at the teaching of the Bible on Kingdom, Church, One Nation, One People – in relationship to the way of the world. A Christian ethic on war must be based on the Bible, and not on what seems to be realistic in society today.

  2.  The "just war" tradition of the established churces
The church as a whole has since Augustine supported the idea of a just war. There is none universally accepted norms for the just war concept, but there is a surprising continuity in the traditional churches in their discussions on a just war. Therefore we can talk of a relative uniform idea tradition, – which has failed to bring about peace.

  3. The three conditions of a "just war".
The main points in this traditions are that on certain conditions war has to be accepted. The conditions are linked to: a. the background for war, b. the purpose of war, c. the way the war is conducted.

  4. The goal does not sanctify the means.
The slogan: "The goal sanctifies the means", is not Christian ethic.

  5.  The purpose of the "just war" doctrine.
The doctrine of just war has a twofold purpose: a. to justify use of military force, b. to partly limit the use of violence in a conflict.

  6.  Reasons to reject the "just war" concept.
The Christian have to reject the "just war" concept for several reasons:
a. it is a non biblical concept,
b. it accept war,
c. it has been used to advance violence,
d. it is not consistent with the teaching and example of Jesus,
e. it is not possible for a Christian soldier in our complicated age to be sure that the background for war, the purpose of war and the way the war is conducted, are after his so called Christian standard for a just war.

  7.  Violence and war are not acceptable
Christians should clearly state that violence is not accepted in any form. Christianity has too many sins on its conscience to continue as before. War is not an acceptable way when political and other conflicts need a solution. Negotiations and international trade boycotts can achieve more than weapons in the long run.

  8.  Work to moderate war
Even if we do not accept war, Christians should work to moderate war by international laws, disarmament, restricting or banning of mass destructive weapons – nuclear-, biological-, chemic- weapons. The just war concept seems to have had a certain moderating effect on war for which we are grateful, and if more can be achieved this way it should not be untried.

  9.  We need to understand the historic failure of the church to make peace
The "just war" concept never became a real hinderance to war, but has had some influence as an ethic instruction. But in the concrete situation the church – or Christians as a group – have very seldom played any significant critical role. Several factors have to be taken into consideration to understand the historic failure of the church to hinder war and make peace:
a. Christians have been children of their age, they have not been ruled by Biblical Kingdom principles that are eternal.
b. Christians have been too loyal to authority. Submission to authority has limits that Christians often mistakenly overlook.
c. Christians have had a tendency to mix up the state as it should act according to theological ideals with the actual government.
d. The government of the national state has been seen as the authority to freely decide the use of violence and military force, not only that the government has the power but that it also has the ethic right to decide how to use it.
e. Limitations of the church mission to only personal matters.
f. A distinction between the moral of the state and the individual. Differing models have been used to create a double set of morals. Against this we must say that the will of God is one.
g. The "just war" doctrine turned the attention towards situations where war already had started or was about to start. Therefore the "just war" doctrine did not give Christians a good starting place to tackle the ethic problems linked to the modern rearmament in times of peace.
h. The rearmament is not identical with the use of weapons in war, therefore the rearmament has escaped the ethic criterias of the "just war".
i. The just war concept and the church has lacked in peacemaking and conflict solving efforts on a long term.
When the church has not succeeded in her peacemaking mission in the world, it can be explained in weaknesses in its ethic instrument (the "just war" concept), but also that the church has been restrained by failing political views that she adopted. Lack of information and strong group-psychological mechanism in society have also made the church ineffective in making peace.