Catholic Just War understanding and the Iran attack

Having carefully read four analyses (but I threw out the one from the magazine Commonweal since they will always just toe the Democrat Party line) it is very difficult to make a judgement. That was the consensus of the other three (from First Things, The Catholic Vote and the Pillar).

I concur that it’s a tough call with the caveat that if the government (Trump & Co.) were lying and fabricating things, then it’s an easy call. Assuming they are not lying, then the main point for me is the fourth bulletin point below, from the Catholic Catechism, “The war must not produce evils graver than the original situation.”

Here is the entire analysis from CatholicVote, from their email two days ago.

What is a faithful Catholic to make of the situation in Iran?

The most important step is to pray—to enlighten our hearts and to protect all those in harm’s way—especially innocents and our own troops. Next, we must properly name what’s happening.

While Congress has not officially declared war on any country since World War II, President Trump is using the means of war while remaining, he believes, within the powers given to the President under Article II of the U.S. Constitution. 

For Catholics, this means the President’s actions must be measured using the time-tested dictates of Just War Theory

When is a war just? The Catechism of the Catholic Church (§2309) and traditional teaching explain that a just war must meet four strict criteria:

  • The aggressor’s damage must be lasting, grave, and certain.
  • All other means of resolution must be ineffective.
  • There must be serious prospects of success.
  • The war must not produce evils graver than the original situation.

Is the cause just? Has Iran caused the United States or neighboring countries lasting, grave, and certain harm? Some argue that Iran’s past deadly assaults on Americans, its unabated nuclear ambitions, and the Iranian government’s unrelenting hatred of America more than reach the level of trauma indicated by this criterion. Detractors of military action say Iran poses no immediate threat and there is no reliable evidence of a soon-to-be-nuclear Iran, therefore war cannot be justified. This remains a contentious debate.

Is there right intention behind the military action? Are we attacking Iran in pursuit of peace and justice for us and also the people of Iran? Or are we simply seeking access to oil? Is war legitimately the last resort? Are recent concessions suggested by Iran enough reason to forestall military strikes in favor of continued diplomatic efforts, or do the past 47 years of failed conversation merit moving on from discussion?

What is the probability of success? Can the United States indeed achieve its goals vis-à-vis Iran? Have those goals been clearly articulated? Are we running the risk of a prolonged Afghanistan-style physical occupation of Iran?

Does the damage being done outweigh the evil being targeted? How dangerous would a nuclear Iran truly be to the United States?

Here’s what we know:

  • War is always terrible, even when it is justified.
  • Iran’s leaders killed tens of thousands of innocents, including Iranians.
  • Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism.
  • Iran was building nuclear weapons and refused to stop or allow legitimate inspections.
  • Iran’s government calls America “the great Satan” and has attempted to assassinate our President.

Here’s what we don’t know:

  • How real is the threat of a nuclear Iran?
  • If that threat exists, how imminent was it at the time of these strikes?
  • Is it truly possible to achieve success without a prolonged, boots-on-the-ground engagement that endangers more and more lives?
  • What government will Iran have after this military engagement? Will it be better or worse?

None of us is in a position to answer all of the questions raised by Operation Epic Fury with certainty. So we must take care in forming and voicing our opinions.

One thing I believe we can all agree on is the need to pray.

Pray for peace.

Pray for restraint among leaders.

Pray for the protection of innocent life—American, Iranian, Israeli, and all others who could be drawn into this conflict.

Pray for justice guided by wisdom, not vengeance.


Comments

11 responses to “Catholic Just War understanding and the Iran attack”

  1. A very interesting analysis indeed.

  2. Tom, you skipped over pretty quickly the possibility that the Trump administration was lying about the reasons for going to war, even though they have changed their story several times now. “Thou shalt not bear false witness” (Exodus 20:16) would also seem to be a consideration here. There are also lesser forms of uttering falsehoods that can include omission of key information. I would hope that all Christians would be very skeptical about those who beat the drums of war, given the teachings of Jesus which after all should bear great weight in such matters.

  3. Dennis Nilsen Avatar
    Dennis Nilsen

    It’s a doctrine, not a theory.

    1. Tom Faranda Avatar
      Tom Faranda

      Dennis you are correct. While it’s frequently referred to as “Just War Theory” it is codified in the Catechism, paragrpahs 2307-2309.

  4. Jessica Dieckman Avatar
    Jessica Dieckman

    This is a great reflection on current events Tom. Thank you! Check out my letter in the Gazette out today. Peace!

  5. “Just war” is a strange contradiction in terms.
    In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus explicitly rejects the principle of retaliation and commands his followers to love their enemies and turn the other cheek. He never outlines circumstances where killing becomes morally justified. The later Just War doctrine seems to arise from theological reasoning developed centuries later, rather than from the teachings that Jesus delivers in the Gospels.
    But I understand that we are human, so we will fall prey to our need to “protect our own” with violence. That said, isn’t it obvious that this war is absolutely immoral? Why do an inventory? It’s clear as day that this is a sin.

    1. Tom Faranda Avatar
      Tom Faranda

      Marina thanks for your thoughtful comment. However I don’t agree that “it is obvious that this war is absolutely immoral.”

      1. That’s sad to hear.

        1. Tom Faranda Avatar
          Tom Faranda

          Yes in a way it’s very sad. Equally sad – actually more sad – is that for decades Iran has supported terror groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. Very sad is that in January they killed by credible estimates about 32,000 of their own citizens for protesting their government. Did I mention Syria? Iran backed the murderous thug Assad for his whole reign of terror. But perhaps we had no business getting involved. So what if their missiles could reach Europe. I admit it’s not clear cut and reasonable people could take either position. Marina have we ever met?

          1. What do you think now that the Pope has made his position clear?

  6. David Kimbley Avatar
    David Kimbley

    Greetings and Salutations, Was the threat of Iran procuring nuclear weapons combined with their ambitions in producing more and longer ranged missals, and their intentions with those weapons gave enough to warrant the attack upon them? The United States intelligence and the Israeli intelligence both thought so. If they were correct, then the decision to attack Iran was not only necessary, but also a very brave act intended to secure peace in Iran, the middle east, in the United States, and in the world. Thank you to our president Trump for having the courage.

Leave a Reply to David Kimbley Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *