Just War 2 (2026)

The original "Just War" thread now has more than 250 posts and, as is the wont of LT threads, has at times wandered far off topic, so perhaps it is time to start a new incarnation of it. Given the new armed conflict which has just broken out with the US and Israeli attacks on Iran, perhaps it is also an opportune moment to remind ourselves of what the Christian "Just War" doctrine actually says. And while there is a growing trend within Christian churches to interrogate critically the "Just War" doctrine and move towards "Just Peace" and Gospel nonviolence, that is not my intention here; I will initially at least confine myself to examining the traditional "Just War" doctrine.

Many people think that for a war to be considered "just" it only needs a "just cause". This is not what traditional Christian "Just War" doctrine teaches. In fact there are several criteria, all of which need to be fulfilled in order for a war to be considered "just". They are expressed in various ways, but I would summarise them as follows: (1) just cause; (2) last resort; (3) legitimate authority; (4) reasonable chance of success; (5) proportionality, ie the harm expected to be done should be less than the good expected to be achieved.

Does the US/Israeli attack on Iran meet these criteria? The following is my opinion.

1. There is no just cause. Iran is not directly threatening the USA. Despite what President Trump has claimed, it appears from credible intelligence reports that there is no likelihood of Iran having either a functioning nuclear weapon or a means of delivering it against the USA for several years (link).

2. It is not a last resort, as negotiations were still ongoing and indeed the mediator, Oman, had just reported that peace was "within reach" as Iran made concessions (link).

3. The USA has no legitimate authority to attack a sovereign state except in self-defence, which is not the case here. Pre-emptive attacks are not considered legitimate, particularly when any potential danger is years away. Only the UN could give a state legitimate authority for an unprovoked attack on another sovereign state. There is also no legitimate authority to assassinate the leader of another sovereign state.

4. What does "reasonable chance of success" mean in this context? While the USA may be able to achieve a short term military "victory", it is unlikely to bring lasting peace, and while it is possible that the assassination of Ali Hosseini Khamenei may lead to regime change, experience suggests that regime change brought about through external (and indeed often even domestic) violence rarely leads to stable, peaceful, democratic, human rights respecting governance (cf Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, inter alia).

5. Proportionality is difficult to assess, but again recent experience suggests that despite claims of "precision surgical strikes", modern warfare involving mainly aircraft, bombs, missiles, drones, cluster munitions, etc rarely confines itself to combatants but disproportionately kills, maims, displaces, impoverishes and traumatises noncombatant civilians while destroying or degrading basic national infrastructure on which civilians depend (health and education services, water, electricity, food security, shelter, etc).

So my own opinion is that there is no way the US/Israeli attack on Iran can be considered a "just war" under traditional Christian doctrines.

As Iran responds to US/Israeli violence with more violence, it's becoming increasingly clear that the "just war" criteria 4 and 5 in >1 John5918: are not met. The war is escalating, affecting neighbouring countries and the global economy, as well as the damage being done to the norms of international law. None of this is a surprise to anyone except those who thought they were launching a quick, clean, decisive and limited strike - much as President Putin apparently thought when he attacked Ukraine, or Israel might have done when it attacked Gaza.

Since 1995 BiBi Netanyahu has been warning us of the immenent threat of Nuclear Attack, so I guess after all these years we have finally found the WMDs,Bush and Cheney were just looking for in the wrong country. Speaking of world war, what about the spiritual genocide the Catholic Church has embarked on. Rome for 60years now has claimed no state of necessity exists. Yet for sixty years popes have described doctrinal confusion, liturical collapse, and loss of faith. Who then is denying reality? Pope Leo's claims that episcopal claims are schismatic? Who started this fire? We are witnessing an historical event the SSPX will concecrate on Wed. July 1. Negative was the response from Rome. Cardinal Tucho who is not a friend has invited us to a meeting. We futher disagree with those that mock Leo and the Holy See. How ever we disagree with examples of teachings coming from Rome. "Non-Catholic Christian can be a means to salvation." False. "Christ should not reign publicly in societies." False. "The Virgin Mary should not be called co-redemptorist." False. The list could go on. BXVI compared the church to a boat taking on water from all sides. Yet Roman beauracrcy remains inflexable to prevent the boat from sinking. Let us pray for Leo that he may guide the Barque of Peter to the safe harber of salvation."JMJ"

As I say in >1 John5918:, it is the wont of LT threads to at times wander far off topic. C'est la vie. But here I merely state traditional Catholic/Christian "just war" doctrine and make no other claims. But yes, Israel possesses nuclear weapons and as such does, as you say, pose an imminent threat of nucelar attack to its neighbours in the Middle East.

Cardinal Parolin: May God silence weapons and reconcile humanity (Vatican News)

Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin presided over a Mass at the Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls in Rome on March 3 as part of celebrations marking the centenary of the Military Ordinariate for Italy... In his homily, Cardinal Parolin petitioned for peace: “In this moment that we all know, we ask the Lord to silence the weapons and reconcile humanity”... He stressed that the Church “never ceases to promote a culture of peace, understood not as disarmed naivety, but as the patient construction of conditions of justice, dialogue, and the protection of rights”... In war scenarios, Cardinal Parolin added, it is particularly important to preserve and “care for” the “military conscience,” since this is “the decisive place where respect for human dignity is at stake, even in the heart of conflict”... At the conclusion of the homily, the Vatican Secretary of State’s prayer for peace also stated his desire: “May the Lord, who in Easter conquered all violence and reconciled the world to Himself, make your service a credible sign of justice and peace”...

I was struck by this meditation on forgiveness and restorative justice, which I think is not unconnected to our attitude to "just war" and Gospel nonviolence. I also see parallels with South African Fr Michael Lapsley's "Healing of Memories".

Wrestling to Forgive

Marietta Jaeger Lane’s daughter Susie was kidnapped and murdered. She recounts wrestling with the concept of forgiveness to restorative justice educator Elaine Enns:

I grew up in a house where we were never allowed to be angry. I was told that to be angry was a sin…. It took two weeks of sitting at the campground picnic table waiting for any news of Susie for my rage to roil up through the many inhibitions I had placed on it. When I finally allowed myself to get in touch with my anger … I knew that I could kill the kidnapper with my bare hands and a smile on my face. Even before I knew what he had done to Susie, I could have killed him for the terror he put her through, for taking her away from us and the effect it had on my entire family.

However, after a major midnight wrestling match with God in which I tried to justify my “right” to rage and revenge, I “surrendered.” Because I believe in a God who never violates our freedom or free will, I gave God permission to change my heart. I promised to cooperate with God in whatever God could do to move my heart from fury to forgiveness.

There was a time in the beginning where I felt that if I forgave the kidnapper, I would be unfaithful to Susie. I also struggled with a belief common to victims of violence—that if I could stay angry and get revenge, I was in control.

I was catapulted into a very intense, spiritual journey, and spent many hours in prayer and reading scripture. God spoke to me frequently. It was a long, gradual process but, during that year, I came to realize three things:

- In staying full of rage I was in fact handing my power over to the kidnapper, allowing his actions to change my value system and lead me away from the direction I wanted my life to go in.
- In God’s eyes the kidnapper was just as precious as my little girl.
- And if I wanted to live my Catholic faith with integrity, I was called to forgive and pray for my enemies.

Lane later became a human rights advocate:

As the months went by with no word of Susie, I also prayed to know what God’s idea of justice was. I came to understand that if Jesus is the word of God made flesh, then Jesus is the justice of God made flesh. As I looked at the life of Jesus in scripture I did not see someone who came to hurt, punish, or put us to death. Jesus came to heal and help us, to rehabilitate and reconcile us, to restore to us the life that was lost by “original sin.” God’s idea of justice is restoration, not punishment.

Reference:
Ched Myers and Elaine Enns, Ambassadors of Reconciliation: Diverse Christian Practices of Restorative Justice and Peacemaking, Volume 2 (Orbis Books, 2009), 60–61.

Southern African Catholic Bishops Express “heartfelt sympathies” to Iran after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei’s Death (ACI Africa)

Members of the Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference (SACBC) have expressed solidarity with the people of Iran following the reported killing of the country’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei. In a statement issued on Tuesday, March 3, the SACBC Secretary General, Fr. Hugh O’Connor, and the SACBC Secretary for the Department of Interreligious Dialogue, Fr. Bonaventure Mashata, call for moral responsibility to halt escalating violence in the Middle East. “We wish to convey our heartfelt sympathies to the bereaved families, to the Shia community, and to the people of Iran during this difficult and painful time,” they say to Iranians mourning the death of the long-time religious and political leader... “Such events bring profound grief not only to your nation, but also to all who value peace, stability, and the sanctity of human life”... In their statement, the SACBC members also drew attention to remarks made by Pope Leo XVI during his Angelus Address on March 1... Pope Leo XIV emphasized that stability and peace cannot be achieved through threats or weapons that bring destruction and death, but rather through “reasonable, sincere, and responsible dialogue,” SACBC officials recall in their statement. They highlight the Holy Father’s appeal for all parties involved in the escalating tensions to recognize their moral responsibility to prevent further violence...

An unjust war (Tablet)

There are very good grounds for saying that the joint attack on Iran by the United States and Israel was reckless, illegal and immoral. The only possible justification – that if successful, it would make the world a better place – depends on a chain of possibilities that are highly implausible... As Sir Keir Starmer put it, in his firm but careful response, the United Kingdom does not believe in “regime change from the skies”: because it would not work and because it would be illegal... The morality and legality of assassinating an enemy by drones, bombs and rockets, with no pretence of due process and no claim to jurisdiction, is highly problematic. Yet such extra-territorial, extra-jurisdictional executions have become part of the tool kit of modern warfare, certainly since the US “took out” Osama bin Laden, founder of al-Qaida, in Pakistan in 2011. This used to be called murder. It is a general trend away from moral and legal norms in the conduct of international relations, towards the more barbaric doctrine of “might is right”... In justifying this war against Iran, Israel pleads that it is acting in self-defence, and that is also the US’ argument... But for decades the threat from Iran has been contained, and only a few months ago the White House was insisting that “Iran’s nuclear facilities have been obliterated and suggestions otherwise are fake news”. Israel and Iran have no shared border and are separated from each other by about 1,000 miles. The chances of an attack on Israel from a much-weakened Iran succeeding were close to zero. So the US and Israel action against Iran was illegal... On the broader issues of just war, such as the legitimacy of pre-emptive strikes, the verdict must also be negative... “The tests need to include an honest weighing of whether the action we seek to forestall is in truth highly probable (not merely possible) and imminent, and of a kind and weight that would leave us crucially damaged. The hurdle of justification for pre-emption should continue to be set very high.” The attack by Israel and the United States on Iran did not come close to meeting those conditions...

In addition, I would say that the prime purpose of traditional Christian "just war" doctrine was not to justify wars, but to prevent and/or limit them unless there are solid and overwhelming reasons to the contrary. Thus the presumption must be in favour of avoiding a war, and the bar must be set very high to overcome that presumption.

Off topic perhaps, but the predecessor of the just war thread often included references to violence in Nigeria, so this article from the New Humanitarian might be of interest:

Beyond “Christian genocide”: The real roots of criminal violence in Nigeria

“The only real way to reduce kidnapping in the long term is to improve economic conditions, reduce unemployment, and curb inflation.” Nigeria is experiencing one of the worst waves of violence in its recent history. While it is often seen as a consequence of rising religious conflict, those working on the ground warn its roots lie in deep structural and social problems. Livelihoods – especially in the rural north – have become increasingly fragile, yet federal and state authorities have failed to provide effective responses to the growing vulnerability. With formal governance systems in these areas weak, armed violence and criminality have found fertile ground in which to expand... For years, the focus of attention has been the northeast and the jihadist insurgencies of Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP). What has tended to be overlooked is the even higher death toll in the northwest due to the violence of criminal groups, known colloquially as “bandits”. Bandit gangs – typically made up of young Fulani men – are entrenched in several rural districts of the northwest and north-centre. In these areas, a government presence is minimal – not only in terms of the police, but also public institutions and access to basic services. Entire communities have been left isolated and neglected. “When these kinds of vacuums are created, armed groups can move to control different aspects of daily life”... “Their violence is driven more by notoriety and economic gain than by ideology”... Populist conspiracy narratives conflate banditry with jihadism. In much of southern Nigeria, Muslim Fulani men are often portrayed as the vanguard of an “Islamification” agenda – a debunked allegation nonetheless echoed by Christian nationalists in the United States. The reality is that banditry is about criminality rather than politics and, as a result, jihadist groups have generally avoided a formal association. “In some states, there are criminal groups that are Fulani, but everyone else gets labelled as Fulani too,” said Ewang. “That fuels hate crimes, hostility, and revenge against the entire {Fulani} community.” Rural violence is often painted as driven by identity-based land disputes between Fulani herders and Hausa farmers in the northwest, or between herders and farming communities in the Middlebelt states. But a UNIDIR report notes that those delineations are far less clear cut, obscuring a tradition of inter-mingling and cultural sharing... Small-holder farmers are increasingly encroaching on cattle routes and grazing reserves, but their political clout – as a settled voting public – skews conflict resolution mechanisms in their favour. Herders – whether bandits or not – are often armed with automatic weapons, which gives them an advantage in most clashes. Their mobility means they also tend not to wait for judicial processes to take their course, souring community relations further, which can then affect other arriving Fulani groups... Rural Fulani were the original victims of Fulani cattle-rustling gangs, but as the criminality expanded, all Fulani tended to be perceived as bandits by Hausa farmers, and became the targets of farmer vigilante groups out for revenge – and loot... Violence affects all communities, whether Fulani, Christian, Muslim, or Hausa – “especially those who depend on farming and herding in rural areas far from urban centres where state presence is limited”...

Cardinal Cupich: 'We must embrace principles to avoid wars' (Vatican News)

In a wide-ranging interview with Vatican Media, Cardinal Blase Cupich, Archbishop of Chicago, calls for restraint to avoid unnecessary military escalation abroad and prevent things from quickly spiraling out of control. He also urges overcoming polarization and protecting the human dignity of all peoples in the United States, in a way that ensures law and human rights are not opposed, but united...

First Lenten Sermon: Peace comes from the courage to be small (Vatican News)

Fr. Roberto Pasolini, the Preacher of the Papal Household, gives his first Lenten meditation, with Pope Leo XIV in attendance, reflecting on the importance of humility as part of our ongoing conversion... Peace, he explained, is not only born from political agreements or diplomatic or military strategies, but from men and women who find the courage to be small. This happens when people step back, renounce violence in all its forms, refuse to give in to the temptation of revenge and dominance, and choose dialogue even when circumstances seem to deny its possibility. Fr. Pasolini called it “a demanding and daily task,” one that concerns everyone who sees themselves as children of God and knows that “this conversion of the heart” is their responsibility...

At the Crossroads (Pax Christi International)

The attack on Iran launched on February 28 has underscored the unmistakable choice facing our world: we will either finally learn, practice, and institutionalize the ability to transform conflict nonviolently, or we will increasingly suffer the consequences of unimaginable violence, including the horrific destruction that domination systems are willing to mete out in their voracious quest for power and control. Those consequences were experienced directly by the women, men and children killed in the punishing assault unleashed by the United States and Israel on Tehran and other cities in Iran, and by those in turn killed by the retaliatory missile attacks launched by Iran across the region. Much more suffering will likely follow. As U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres declared during a special session of the Security Council called to address the crisis, “Military action carries the risk of igniting a chain of events that no one can control in the most volatile region of the world.” As with previous wars initiated by the United States in the Middle East, there is no telling what will come of this, on the ground and internationally. Geopolitically, this “war of choice” is strategically suspect, as many commentators and analysts have said when they stress that no substantial rationale has been advanced by the Trump administration for taking such dubious, risky, and lethal action. But the Catholic Nonviolence Initiative does not oppose this precipitous war only in light of a “strategic calculus” gauging potential geopolitical fallout. Fundamentally, this stance is rooted in a conclusion it has been driven to both theologically and pragmatically: violence is the titanic spiritual crisis of our time that violence cannot quell. Violence—any personal, interpersonal, or structural behavior, policy, or condition that destroys, dominates, disinherits, or dehumanizes—does not resolve conflict; it deepens and broadens it. It unleashes trauma and deep grief. It desecrates the humanity of its victims. And it extends this unresolved conflict into the future. Violence touches off either the explosive and unpredictable counter-violence of retaliation and escalation—or it feeds a smoldering resentment and revenge, increasing the likelihood of future combat... Pope Leo has called for the parties of this new war to pursue the nonviolent alternative...

An Impeccable Commitment to Nonviolence: Saint Oscar Romero, Martyr (Pax Christi International)

Archbishop Romero was a very traditional prelate – quite conservative, kind, a good preacher and apolitical. He tended to understand the Gospel as one of peace and reconciliation and thought that the pursuit of social justice and liberation would inevitably lead to division and violent conflict. But Romero encountered the Gospel in living color as he accompanied individuals and communities who were impoverished and brutally violated by the powerful of El Salvador and he was evangelized by those experiences. Romero took on the evil as Christ did – to overcome it and to utterly defend God’s cause, the cause of justice, the cause of just peace... But his commitment to nonviolence was impeccable. He positioned himself in a very narrow space where he could speak truth publicly and privately based on the stories he heard and the reality he witnessed day after day – where he could plead for an end to all the violence, for a peace that was (in his own words) not the silence of cemeteries, but shalom... But the role of Archbishop Romero, the depth and character of his spirituality, the finesse of his public positioning and powerful witness in an extremely complex political context, make him an exceptional model for would-be disciples of Christ and perhaps especially for those of us whose commitment to nonviolence is constantly challenged by egregious attacks on vulnerable people and our planet. Romero walked a fine line between the violence of repression and systemic injustice on the one hand — and that of war, of violent revolution on the other. He was critical of both, always maintaining a distance that gave him clear vision… though he had clearly chosen the side of justice and liberation because he accompanied the poor; he saw the reality of their lives and he supported their struggle to end the oppression that constantly threatened their survival. Romero repeatedly challenged the culture of death, that in which he was immediately immersed, but also its roots and expressions beyond El Salvador. His holding of life sacred was not rhetorical, but a daily creative task. What Romero resisted was death, the death of children ill from curable diseases, the death of hope in young people, the death of those who stood up to the gods of death, – death from war, torture, poverty, cynicism, despair. Romero was a prophet in the most classical sense...

Full text of Oral statement delivered by: Pax Christi International to the 61st Regular Session of the Human Rights Council, 23 February – 31 March 2026 - Panel discussion on human rights and a culture of peace

Summary:

Today, March 4th 2026, together with our co-signing partners, International Office of Catholic Education (OIEC), Vides Internazionale, Istituto Internazionale Maria Ausiliatrice (IIMA), Franciscans International, Associazione Comunità Papa Giovanni XXIII, Edmund Rice International and World Union of Catholic Women’s Organisations (WUCWO), we delivered a joint statement at the 61st session of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva. The statement was presented by Pax Christi International through Jonathan Frerichs, our main representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva, during the panel discussion on human rights and a culture of peace. In our intervention, we expressed deep concern about global conflicts and structural injustices that undermine human dignity. Too often, so-called “peace efforts” address only the symptoms of conflict rather than their root causes. We stressed that the voices of the Global South, too often marginalised, must shape decisions affecting their lives, and that political legitimacy relies on inclusion and accountability. Situations of grave concern, such as the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Haiti and Myanmar, show that peace must be rooted in justice, participation, and respect for international law, not unilateral or technocratic approaches. Our statement reaffirmed the essential role of genuine multilateralism, embodied by the United Nations, in tackling global challenges. We called for renewed commitment to human rights, dialogue, solidarity, social progress, and care for our common home, for present and future generations. We also highlighted the urgent moral challenge of rearmament, especially nuclear, and called for integral human disarmament that addresses both weapons and the structures that normalize violence. Sustained investment in peace education and Nonviolence, and the engagement of women as peacebuilders and young people as agents of change, are vital to building a just and lasting peace. Pax Christi International, together with our partners, reaffirms its commitment to this vision, advocating for a culture of peace grounded in inclusion, accountability, and shared responsibility.

>13 brone:

Just for the record, I believe Pax Christi opposes abortion as part of a consistent ethic of life; this is not "downplaying" it, but neither is it downplaying other death-dealing activities. As for anti-semitism, I believe there was an allegation by an Austrian bishop in 2017. In 2018 Pax Christi reaffirmed its opposition to anti-semitism: "Pax Christi International strongly denounces the anti-Semitic tensions in our societies and worldwide. Anti-Semitism or hatred of Jews is condemnable and unacceptable. Pax Christi International stands for the human rights of all individuals and of all peoples. The roots of human rights are to be found in the dignity that belongs to each human being" (link). However criticism of military actions taken by the current Israeli government does not in itself constitute anti-semitism.

>15 brone:

Thanks for your summary of traditional Christian "just war" doctrine in six points. I summarised it in five, but while there is general agreement on the criteria for a "just war", there is no set form of words, so I have no disagreement with you there, although you have omitted one criterion, that of last resort, which would become your number 7. So whether we use your choice of words or mine, the current military action by the USA against Iran does not meet the criteria for a just war. The USA has no legitimate (or "proper") authority to attack another sovereign state which poses no direct or immediate threat to it (2). The USA has not clearly laid out its aim in any coherent fashion, so it is impossible to conclude that it has "a good chance of success" in anything other than a limited tactical military sense (3). If the aim was regime change, then again recent past experience of US efforts to achieve regime change by force suggests that short term military success does not lead to a better regime (cf Afghanstan, Iraq, Libya). Although the Iranian regime is pretty abhorrent, the USA has no "good reason" to attack it militarily (4). The overwhelming level of force being applied by the USA, with its concomitant civilian death toll and degradation and destruction of essential civilian infrastructure, can hardly be said to be using no more force than you need (6). And it fails to meet the criterion of "last resort" as negotiations were still ongoing and indeed the mediator, Oman, had just reported that peace was within reach (7).

I agree with you that "the brotherhood of man" is gibberish, or at least anachronistic. I prefer to speak of the "community of humanity", which also encompasses the more than fifty percent of the population who are not male. I fail to see what hippies have to do with Christian "just war" doctrine - I don't think there were many of them around during the time of Augustine or Aquinas when this attempt to prevent and limit wars was first mooted by the Christian church. If hippies are now insisting on applying the Christian "just war" doctrine then surely we should welcome them as traditionalists, as opposed to the modernists who try to ignore, downplay or by-pass this doctrine? Chamberlain was a man of principle who did not want to see a repeat of the bloodshed of the Great War. His efforts failed, but pragmatists will note that he gave Britain an extra year to prepare for war with Nazi Germany; my parents' generation would certainly not have had the military preparedness in 1938 which they had achieved by September 1939. In 1940 the RAF were able to win the Battle of Britain and arguably stave off an invasion; would they have been able to do so in 1939? By 1939 it could be argued that war was a last resort; in 1938 it wasn't.

How do you define a "brave and sincere sort" of pacifist? The ones who are prepared to die for their belief, to go to prison for it, to be reviled by the mainstream media and populist political ideologies, to lose their livelihoods, to devote their time and resources to campaigning for peace and supporting the victims of war?

I can join you in saying "I knew war in a particularly ugly and futile form", living and working in a war zone for 22 years, often in the front line, often under fire, and this experience led me to believe that war is always "ugly and futile" and that we need to do everything we can to avoid and limit wars. One tool at our disposal is a commitment to active nonviolent resistance (which is not the same as pacifism), and another is to take seriously the traditional "just war" doctrine, whose original purpose, which hasn't changed even though it might now be considered politically inconvenient by some, was to prevent and limit wars, not to justify them. Christians need to stand up and insist on traditional Christian doctrine here rather than simply bowing to the norms of modern political ideology.

Edited to add: Talking of "brave and sincere" anti-war protesters, singer “Country Joe” McDonald has just died. His protest against the Vietnam war caused him significant legal and professional consequences. In 1968, Ed Sullivan cancelled a planned appearance by Country Joe and the Fish on his variety show when he learned of the new anti-war cheer. Soon after Woodstock, McDonald was arrested and fined for using the cheer at a show in Worcester, Massachusetts, an ordeal which helped hasten the band’s demise (link). As a reminder that anti-war protesters are not one-dimensional hippy caricatures, McDonald acknowledged conflicted feelings about Vietnam. He had served in the navy in Japan in the late 1950s, and in the '90s he helped organise the construction of a Vietnam veterans memorial in Berkeley. “Many remembered the ugly confrontations that had happened during the war years in the city,” he later wrote of the ceremony, “Yet the atmosphere proved to be one of reconciliation, not confrontation.” Amongst "brave and sincere" Christian anti-Vietnam war activists we can number Martin Luther King Jr, Jesse Jackson, Coretta Scott King, James Bevel of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Dorothy Day, Thomas Merton, Daniel and Philip Berrigan, the "Catonsville Nine", many other clergy and nuns of all denominations, Quakers, Mennonites and numerous others.

Recently there was an international webinar on the conflict in Sudan. Parts of it are Sudan-specific, but for those who like watching video presentations I would recommend the section on active nonviolent resistance from around 26:42 to 48:00. John Prendergast's presentation on “Illegal Arms and Resource Flows into Sudan and How to Stop Them” from 48:50 to about 1:02:00 highlights another area of nonviolent resistance.

Link

>18 brone:

No, no, no! That's not what traditional Christian "just war" doctrine teaches. To suggest that a "just war analysis has to begin as a strong presumption of violence" completely misunderstands, and in fact reverses, the origins and tradition of this doctrine. The presumption, from the time of Augustine and Aquinas onwards, is that war is evil and is to be avoided at all costs except in certain strictly defined, very limited and exceptional circmstances, summed up in the words of my five points and your six (or seven) above. Thus the bar must be set very high to overcome the default presumption against war.

Let me quickly respond to a few of your other comments in case you delete them as per usual. The number of Americans killed by Iran "for years" is actually very small, especially when compared to the number of Iranians currently being killed by Americans in a matter of days. It's always labelled as "unwise" by opponents when "our ecclesial leaders issue confident moral judgments" on matters of Christian doctrine - cf Martin Luther King on civil rights, the likes of Archbishops Desmond Tutu and Denis Hurley on apartheid, Pope Saint John Paul II's condemnation of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, various popes' condemnations of nuclear weapons going back as far as Pope Saint John XXIII's Pacem in Terris in 1963, and Catholic opposition to abortion and euthanasia - some have been murdered for speaking out with "confident moral judgments" against the dominant political and cultural assumptions, including MLK in the USA, Archbishop Oscar Romero in El Salvador and Archbishop Janani Luwum in Uganda. This military attack on Iran was in no way a last resort, as negotiations were still ongoing. Iran is years away from creating a nuclear weapon and the means to deliver it, as US intelligence agencies have themselves reported, and your president himself confidently announced just a few months ago. You dismissively refer to negotiations as a "dance", but surely such dancing is better than bombing schoolgirls?

Irish bishops to pray for peace and safety of migrants on St Patrick’s Day (Tablet)

Meeting for their Spring General Gathering in Maynooth, the Irish bishops published a statement calling for peace in the Middle East and describing war as ‘utterly destructive’. Ahead of celebrations for St Patrick’s Day, the Irish bishops have called for prayers for world peace and the safety of all migrants. Referring to the tension and volatility in the world today, they appealed for prayers for peace and healing, and that “the voices of hatred will be replaced by a politics dedicated to upholding the God-given dignity of every human person, the common good and solidarity with those in need”. “In an era of change and readjustment of geopolitical balances and cultural paradigms, war is not the answer. No political leader has the authority to unleash war at will,” they stressed. The Irish Episcopal Conference said the uncertainty caused by the current situation in the Middle East is destabilising for the world on many fronts – politically, socially and economically. “This is a time for international diplomacy to work for peace based on justice”... In their call for nationwide prayers for world peace on St Patrick’s Day, the bishops highlighted that the national patron was himself an emigrant. “As we celebrate St Patrick’s Day this year on Tuesday 17 March, we remember our national patron as a pioneer for peace and reconciliation.” “Given the importance of our national feast day, we also ask parishes to reach out to people from around the world who have come to live within our communities, and to extend greetings of prayerful support and solidarity at this time”...

The divided Middle East – a war rooted in false promises (Tablet)

The catastrophe unfolding in the Middle East has a very dark history. It is partly driven by the distortion of religious faith to serve political and ideological agendas. The skewed versions of the religions involved are all relatively recent hybrids that involve the fusion of faith with an ideology, with the resulting mixture then being recruited by politicians and activists for corrupt purposes. This has been happening in Iran – and in the United States and Israel... Christian Zionism, often linked with “dispensationalism”, is a relatively recent arrival in the US, with roots in the nineteenth-century British Evangelical movement, especially the Plymouth Brethren... Much later, mainly post-1967, the idea that God had given the land to the Jews became the core belief of modern Jewish religious Zionism, looking for a theological rationale for Israel’s right to exist... So both these theological driving forces helping to propel recent events in the Middle East are of recent, and strongly contested, origin. That is equally true of the theological force behind Iran’s opposition to Israel, a deviation from traditional Shi’ism that arose around the time the Shah was overthrown in 1979. Until then Shia Islam had been a comparatively tolerant and open religion... So these origins of the present conflict arise from eccentric deviations from mainstream religious movements, not from their core traditions and values. If normative Protestant Christianity in the United States, mainstream Judaism in Israeli religious circles and more traditional Sunni and Shia Islam in Iran and the Arab states could prevail over their deviant derivatives, the Middle East would not be facing such a disaster...

Another indication that the current US-Israeli war cannot be classified as a "just war" under traditional Christian "just war" doctrine. It clearly was not a "last resort" if both Oman and the UK beliieved they were on the “verge of a real deal” and the Iranians were offering "highly significant concessions" (link).

Writing in the Economist, Badr Albusaidi, the Omani minister who mediated the latest nuclear talks between Iran and the US, offered an unusually damning assessment of events leading up to the US and Israel’s bombing of Iran and the war it has triggered across the Middle East... According to Albusaidi, Iran and the US had been on the “verge of a real deal” in nuclear negotiations held in Geneva in February, describing the talks as “substantive”. As revealed by the Guardian this week, a similar assessment had been made by the UK’s national security adviser, Jonathan Powell, who attended the final stages of the nuclear talks. According to sources, he had been surprised at the significant progress towards a permanent, substantive nuclear deal and judged that it was enough to halt a war between the two sides... Sources said the Iranians had agreed to highly significant concessions including a reduction and pause on their enrichment of uranium and also offered the US the chance to participate in a future civil nuclear programme, in exchange for a lifting of sanctions and unfreezing of assets. A final phase of negotiations had been planned for the following week in Vienna, but 48 hours after the talks finished, the US and Israel began their strikes on Iran...

From ‘Just War’ to just peace (Tablet)

Both sides in the war claim to be acting in ‘legitimate self-defence’. More than a thousand have died, millions more displaced and its economic consequences are being felt by people around the world. How can we break out of the cycle of violence?... However degraded the military capability of Iran might be, if the root causes remain unaddressed, the threat of more cycles of violence will only have increased. A Just Peace ethical framework would instead aim to break cycles of violence, to engage constructively, and build sustainable peace. It would radically shift the discourse and the power dynamics. Just peace is not merely the absence of war. It is positive peace. This is not gullible or naive. It is rooted in the experiences and voices of people who have lived through war in South Sudan, Iraq, Myanmar, Colombia, the DRC, Mexico, Philippines and South Africa. Forms of non-violent resistance – protests, boycotts, civil disobedience and other forms of non-violent non-cooperation – have been shown to be more effective than their violent counterparts. In an Easter message in 2023, Pope Francis said, “To truly say ‘No’ to war and violence, it is not enough just to silence weapons and stop the aggressors. It is necessary to pull up the roots of wars and violence, which are resentment, envy, and greed. Peacemakers must have the courage to ‘disarm’ hearts, to ‘demilitarise’ them, to remove poison and resentment.” Francis added, “These words may sound utopian,” but, he insisted, “it is not utopian, it is healthy realism.” A just peace approach is not passive or quiescent. It requires non-violent action: public witness and, if necessary, disruption, in co-ordination with other groups including the many non-violent movements in Israel. Influential voices – especially on the right – that are critical of the US-Israeli action should be amplified. The faith-based narratives that enable the war should be robustly addressed. Reports have surfaced that some US military leaders have been calling troops to fight because the war in Iran will bring about the second coming of Jesus: Christian leaders should expose these distortions of the Gospel, and call for Christians not to fight in this war. Since the US-Israeli attacks began, Pope Leo has consistently called for a return to diplomacy. There are credible third parties, such as the United Nations, the EU, France, India and some of the Gulf states, which could open up steps towards agreed reductions or pauses in the bombing – and the space this would open up could be used for more creative thinking about pathways towards a more sustainable peace. The point of a just peace strategy is not to wait for the other side to do something constructive. For example, Pope Leo or the US bishops might revive contacts with religious leaders in Iran (the Shia cleric and scholar Ayatollah Mostafa Mohaghegh Damad has been in contact with the Pope). A just peace approach requires a “re-humanisation” in our language, narratives and symbols. This does not mean ignoring harmful acts or unjust policies. It is a recognition of the sacred dignity of the other... The more we describe adversaries as “evil” or “monsters”, the more we enable cycles of violence... In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ said, “You’ve been told, ‘An eye for eye, and a tooth for a tooth’”, but he urged his followers to respond to violence in a different way. To break cycles of violence and to live out the mission of the Church calls for recognising the sacred dignity of every person and for responding to threats and attacks with ­creative, active nonviolence.

>9 John5918: Another thoughtful reflection on the complexity of the violence in Nigeria:

'Peace is a gradual thing': How land, cattle and identity fuel a deadly Nigerian conflict (BBC)

Such incidents have fuelled controversial claims that Christians face persecution, even genocide in Nigeria, which have been used to justify recent US military intervention in the country. The Nigerian government denies such claims, saying that members of all faiths have suffered amidst myriad conflicts which have engulfed rural parts of the country. Muslim communities in northern Nigeria, where they are the majority population, have largely borne the brunt of attacks by Islamist militants like Boko Haram and heavily armed gangs. But Christian minorities there have been victims too... The conflict in Plateau has its own dynamics. The state has historic links to American missionaries. It is home to more than 50 ethnic groups. Christians are the majority, but many here are Muslim too. For decades, local politicians have sought power by playing on ethnic and religious identity. Those considered "indigenes" by the local authorities get preferential access to jobs and land - they tend to be from mostly Christian ethnic groups. While those considered "settlers" include many from Muslim communities, like the Fulani, even if they have lived on the land for generations. In 2001, communal violence erupted in the state capital Jos and more than 1,000 people were killed, both Muslim and Christian. More were forced to flee... For some, ethnicity and religion are so intertwined that an attack on one is interpreted as an attack on the other. But for Wada Waziri, it is not principally a religious conflict. It is about politics, ethnicity and competition for resources, as well as simple criminality... Even in Plateau, the violence is not universal. Not far away from Zike lies the town of Mista Ali. "Everybody is living in peace and we don't have any problem with anybody. All of us live in peace," says Chief Dr Danladi Akinga Kasuwa. He is a Christian and a traditional ruler among the Pengana peoples. Out on the streets of Mista Ali, he is greeted wherever he goes. "Muslim, Christian, no problem. The Fulani are our brothers, the indigenes are our brothers, all," he says. In 2001, he says he immediately called together the leaders of all ethnic groups in his area to stop any violence spreading from the city to their community. Ever since, they have kept a lid on the conflict. "I don't tolerate nonsense," he tells me. "If we see anybody trying to bring problem we arrest him. Even my son, I deal with him. "No tribalism, no sentiment or different religions. We worship one God." But it is hard to keep the peace. A core source of conflict is competition for the land. It is an issue across Nigeria, that often pits farmers against herders, irrespective of faith...

Eastern Catholic bishops issue 'cry for peace and justice' as global conflicts rage (NCR)

The bishops of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the U.S. have issued "a cry for peace and justice," as they are "anguished" by atrocities and suffering in the nations where their respective communities originated. The prelates — representing several of the 23 Eastern Catholic Churches that with the Latin Catholic Church comprise the universal Catholic Church, headed by the pope — assembled March 17-19 for their annual spring meeting... Amid the sessions, the bishops reflected on the current situation in their various ecclesial homelands, many of which are experiencing war and related violence. In particular, Eastern Catholics in Ukraine and the Middle East have been in the crosshairs of conflict... Lebanon, the ancient home of Maronite Catholics, and several other Middle East nations have come under attack since the U.S.-Israel war on Iran was launched Feb. 28 and has been met with counterattacks... Quoting Pope Leo XIV, they called upon world leaders "to begin a 'disarmament of heart, mind, and life,'" seeking what the pope has championed as "a reasonable, authentic, and responsible dialogue." In particular, the bishops directed that message to U.S. leaders. "We appeal to those in power in the United States and globally to protect and defend the innocent and vulnerable and engage in diplomacy to forge just and lasting peace," they said...

Washington’s peacemaker: Cardinal Robert McElroy (Tablet)

To be the Cardinal Archbishop of Washington when the United States has launched an illegal and irresponsible war in the Middle East is no small matter. It falls to him to explain how badly it fails both the Church’s general stance in favour of non-violence, as well as its criteria allowing resort to war in emergency situations. He must echo Pope Leo’s plea for a ceasefire, knowing that President Trump’s response is, “You don’t do a ceasefire when you’re literally obliterating the other side.” And he must do so as pastor as well as prophet, aware that in his congregations many work in the Trump administration or in Washington’s huge military-industrial complex, and that there will be Mass-goers whose children or spouses serve in the military.

Providential, then, that since March last year it is Robert McElroy – possibly the finest public intellectual ever to lead the archdiocese, as well as a humble pastor in the Pope Francis mould – who must thread that needle. Days before we sat down for an interview at Washington DC’s Georgetown University, he had laid out the Church’s position on the war with admirable caution and clarity in his diocesan newspaper. It is a mark of how well he has done it that so far none of his fellow bishops in the famously divided US bishops’ conference has challenged his assertions.

Summarising the contemporary Church’s “abiding resistance to war”, Cardinal McElroy recalls John Paul II’s firm opposition to the 2003 US-led Iraq invasion, Benedict XVI clarifying the inadmissibility of its justification as a “preventive war”, as well as Francis’ claim that war can solve nothing, and Leo XIV deploring the present “raging zeal for war … which is utterly incompatible with the Catholic faith”. Following Jesus Christ’s example, McElroy says simply: “Non-violence must be the first stance of Catholics in the world.”

Non-violence is not pacifism. In “some emergency situations”, the cardinal explains in the Catholic Standard, the Church has allowed resort to war, but so strictly that six conditions must be “clearly and simultaneously met”. The cause must be just (essentially, self-defence against an imminent or actual attack) and lawful (that is, a formal declaration by the legitimate authority). There must be right intention (a clear aim of redressing the specific just cause and to restore peace), and non-bellicose means of securing these must have been exhausted. There must be a credible hope of success, and the foreseen destruction must not outweigh the expected good.

Given what we increasingly know about the US decision to go to war against Iran, and how much it was driven by Israel’s 40-year-old ambition to secure regime change, the cardinal exercises great restraint in saying only that at least half of these conditions have not been met: there was no imminent threat of an attack on the US, the intentions are confused, and the likelihood is that it will bring not peace but further escalation. Examined in the light of Catholic teaching, therefore, “our entry into this war was not morally legitimate”, McElroy says, adding that it is even more important to draw it to a close as soon as possible. As the disastrous record of US interventions in the Middle East shows, he warns, “there is a logic to war that presses onward, escalating in its dimensions and timeline”...

Where once the United States used its fire power to constrain reckless tyrants and imperialists, underwriting the rules-based world order, the search is on now for a new world order capable of constraining the US and Israel. It is also, for McElroy as it has been for recent popes, a time to recover the centrality of non-violence in Jesus’ teaching. While he was still Bishop of San Diego, he and the Myanmar cardinal, Charles Bo, helped launch Pax Christi’s Catholic Institute for Nonviolence in Rome on the eve of the 2024 synod. I have my notes still: McElroy argued that while the “just war” tradition has possession of Catholic theology, it was time to make non-violence central to it, without excluding just war as a fallback in rare emergency situations. Quoting Francis in Fratelli Tutti, who argued that taking part in war is incompatible with loving our brothers and sisters as Christ asks us to, McElroy said that non-violence was a far more effective way of creating and sustaining justice, and that one of the most important contributions the Church could make was to demonstrate this.

What lies behind this shift? A big part of it is the nature of modern weaponry, he says: their sheer level of destructiveness, the billions poured into them. “All of that makes war something it was not before: a more barbarous reality – even as it becomes, in a sense, more antiseptic and technological”... The second reason he gives is the totality of modern war... His third reason is the way that just-war reasoning is vulnerable nowadays to co-option... McElroy thinks the phrasing in the Catechism makes for a “fatal provision” because it can be construed to mean – as Weigel argued – that governments are responsible not just for deciding to go to war but for ascertaining the moral rightness of doing so. “My view is, that’s not true at all,” McElroy tells me. “It’s an objective measure.” For a war to be just, certain conditions must be fulfilled. “The rightness of whether {these} have been satisfied is not determined by those who make the decision to go to war. It’s determined by objective reality. Are these true or not? We need to say this hard and clear. This is this, this is this. And to object to wars that clearly fall short of that.” But the wording in the Catechism doesn’t help to make this clear...

So often bishops’ formulations on moral matters are phrased in careful, highly nuanced language that falsely assumes they are speaking to societies pre-cooked in Christian moral assumptions. Whereas, as Francis saw clearly, the loss of those assumptions is now dramatic, meaning that the bishops are either not heard or their authority is co-opted by ideologues. In 2003 for example, Weigel tried to reassure waverers that, whatever modern popes may bang on about, the “classic” just war tradition does not begin with a presumption against war. The same critique has been made by the Wall Street Journal, where it was argued that by calling for a ceasefire and a return to diplomacy Pope Leo has somehow abandoned the Church’s own teachings on war. To be heard, the Church needs to start a few places back – back to basics, as it were – and to say: war is wrong because it destroys, it kills, it devastates. This is what Francis did so well, asking us to look at who pays the price for war, to give proper weight to the suffering, especially of the poor.

McElroy agrees this is the “huge difference” Francis made. “He taught us a different way to gauge the calculus by his emphasis on the disproportionate ways war falls on the poor and the marginalised, those who have less power in society: those for whom destructiveness means decades of homelessness, not only a month or two.” Francis’ view on this was so strong that at times, I suggested, it was hard to know if he thought it was ever possible in the modern era to justify a war. “I don’t know that he believed you could,” agrees McElroy, adding that this was, essentially, also the stance of Paul VI and John Paul II, who spoke of all war as defeat and failure.

How might Leo take this forward? McElroy doesn’t know, but suggests that the big question he faces now is the collapse of the multilateralism that Catholic Social Teaching so emphasises, and the normalisation of Morgenthau-type “realism”, which sees national interest purely in terms of achieving dominance in a struggle with powerful rivals. What matters now, says McElroy, is to institutionalise active non-violence, “to show how it’s effective, and to build institutions in society that operate from that stance. One of the reasons active non-violence is so effective is because if people come to a settlement that hasn’t destroyed or dominated the other, the settlement tends to last longer.”

Theologically, a case needs to be made – and demonstrated – that non-violence as practised by Jesus is not a renunciation of power, but trust in the true power of the universe, in God’s own weapons of love, trust, and patience. Peace cannot be brought about by those who wage war, only by its victims; and resort to war is a form of despair, a pessimism that cannot build us back better but can only corrode and embitter us. McElroy believes the Church now needs to be so identified with the primacy of non-violence that it becomes known for it, that Christians “must go the farthest mile in active non-violence”. In a world dominated not by law but by the libido dominandi, McElroy says that in order “to protect against tremendous, barbarous injustice”, there may be times when in the last resort force is needed, but even here the Church’s “just war” teaching serves as a strict restraint on it, demanding of those who would wage war a true conscience-searching exercise, both in the decision to resort to the use of armed force (jus ad bellum) and in the way in which war is conducted (jus in bello)... The contemptuous casting aside of traditional Catholic principles of restraint in war, often by supposedly Christian leaders, has exposed how unapologetically pagan the powers of this world have become.

Couldn't have summarised it better myself! Apologies for the long quote, but I think it is important, and it robustly addresses some of the now deleted pro-war arguments espoused in this thread. An egregious example, in the now deleted post >18 brone:, was that "just war analysis has to begin as a strong presumption of violence". The good cardinal completely debunks that, as he does other erroneous understandings of the traditional "just war" doctrine.

Middle East: Stop this madness (Tablet)

Who will shout: “Stop – this is madness”? The Middle East resembles two runaway trains hurtling towards each other on the same track, seconds from a catastrophe. They are heading nowhere... In the desire of some of its leaders to exterminate Israel, there is no way Iran has an achievable goal. Seven million Jews cannot be made to vanish just by launching missiles at them, nor indeed by any other means. Similarly, in their desire to smash Iran into ruins, Israel’s leaders have set an objective that can never be realised. Persian civilisation is too deeply and proudly embedded ever to be overthrown by bombing from the air, or even by invasion on land or sea. There are more than 90 million Iranians... The third train on this track to nowhere is the United States, controlled by a man whose mind is visibly degenerating, with no grasp of strategy and scarcely any tactics, and which has allowed itself to be manoeuvred into an impossible position which will cost it dearly. In this crisis the future of the American Republic itself is at stake, blinded by the possession of the most powerful military apparatus the world has ever seen. Powerful and yet pointless. It cannot impose its will on others by force alone. A policy relying wholly on “bluster, blackmail and bombing”, as one military analyst described it, cannot succeed; never has and never will. To reverse Von Clausewitz’s famous dictum, all wars end in politics sooner or later...

>28 brone:

Just for the record, allegations about Cardinal McElroy were robustly discussed on the sexual abuse thread in this Christianity group (post 238ff in this link). I respectfully draw your attention once again to an article posted on 13th March 2025 (link) offering a more complete and more nuanced view of the allegations than you present here. You responded to that article, but you have deleted your posts so it's difficult to remember what your reaction to this information was at the time.

US military archbishop says Iran conflict does not meet ‘just war’ standard (Guardian)

The leader of all Catholic chaplains in the United States’ armed forces has questioned how righteous the US military’s campaign in Iran is, saying that “under the just war theory – it is not”. Archbishop Timothy Broglio, head of the Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services USA, told CBS News in an interview set for broadcast Sunday that while Iran “was a threat with nuclear arms”, waging war on the theocratic state constituted “compensating for a threat before the threat is actually realized”... “The Lord Jesus certainly brought a message of peace and also – I think war is always a last resort,” Broglio told CBS. “I’m not making a judgment about that because I really don’t know. But I do think that it’s hard to cast this war – you know – as something that would be sponsored by the Lord”... Broglio said he would line himself up with Pope Leo XIV, history’s first US-born Catholic pontiff, “who has been urging for negotiation”... Broglio said he counseled Catholic service members to “do as little harm as you can – and to try {to} preserve innocent lives”. He noted that the way conscientious objection is framed in the US military, “you cannot object to a specific war or a specific action. You can only object to ‘I’m opposed to war.’” He added: “The question might be, would generals or admirals have space to perhaps, say, ‘Can we look at this a different way?’ “But having spoken to some of them too, they’re also in the same dilemma.”

Cardinal Pizzaballa on Maundy Thursday: ‘We are here to celebrate life' (Vatican News)

The Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, presides over the In Coena Domini Mass behind closed doors in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. He says that at a time marked by tensions that cannot be ignored, “we are here as within a womb of peace, while around us the world is torn apart, and we wish we could change all of this”...

Nearly 400 sentenced in Nigeria for links to militant Islamists (BBC)

Nearly 400 people have been sentenced in Nigeria for links with militant Islamic groups following mass trials. The convicts were given sentences ranging from five years to life imprisonment after linked to Boko Haram or a rival splinter group, the Islamic State West Africa Province (Iswap). The trials came at a time when the government is under intense pressure to curb rising insecurity in Africa's most-populous state. Security forces are battling multiple armed groups, from militant Islamists to separatists, and kidnapping-for-ransom gangs...

In Easter Message, Nigeria’s Catholic Bishops Decry “bad leadership,” Urge Hope and Civic Responsibility (ACI Africa)

Catholic Bishops in Nigeria have decried Nigeria’s worsening insecurity and governance challenges, while urging citizens to remain hopeful and actively participate in shaping the nation’s future... “Many Nigerians still bear crosses of grief and heartbreak caused by unabating insurgency, incessant kidnappings, and armed banditry,” CBCN members say in their message. They attribute the crisis to “many years of bad leadership; leadership marked by selfishness, greed, nepotism, tribalism, sectionalism, and a total lack of commitment to the common good.” Drawing parallels with the Resurrection of Christ, the Catholic Church leaders expressed hope for national renewal...

US Bishop’s chairman on Doctrine clarifies Just War Theory (Vatican News)

Given the recent public comments regarding the Catholic Church's teaching on war and peace, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) posted a statement on their website on April 15, 2026, of Bishop James Massa, chairman of the USCCB's Committee on Doctrine, who stated the following:

“For over a thousand years, the Catholic Church has taught just war theory and it is that long tradition the Holy Father carefully references in his comments on war. A constant tenet of that thousand-year tradition is a nation can only legitimately take up the sword ‘in self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed’ (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2308). That is, to be a just war it must be a defense against another who actively wages war, which is what the Holy Father actually said: ‘He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war.’

“When Pope Leo XIV speaks as supreme pastor of the universal Church, he is not merely offering opinions on theology, he is preaching the Gospel and exercising his ministry as the Vicar of Christ. The consistent teaching of the Church is insistent that all people of good will must pray and work toward lasting peace while avoiding the evils and injustices that accompany all wars.”

The Magisterium of the Popes and nuclear weapons (Vatican News)

Since the tragedy caused by the atomic bombings of Japan in August 1945, the Church has reflected on the risk of humanity destroying itself... Pope Leo has continued along the path traced by his predecessors’ magisterium...

Japan loosens arms export rules in break from post-WW2 pacifism (BBC)

Japan has relaxed decades-old restrictions on its arms exports, clearing the way for it to sell weapons to more than a dozen countries. The announcement on Tuesday marks a milestone in Tokyo's shift away from the pacifism that has characterised its post-war defence policy. It also comes at a time of heightened tensions in the region. Restrictions that limit arms exports to just five categories - rescue, transport, warning, surveillance and minesweeping - will be lifted. This means Japan can now sell lethal weapons to the 17 countries with which it has defence agreements, including the US and the UK. A ban on arms sales to countries involved in conflict will stay, although it does not cover those that have defence pacts with Japan. Authorities in Tokyo say they will allow for exceptions "in special circumstances"...

‘Stop sucking up to America’: Japan’s youth rises up to protect pacifist constitution (Guardian)

“I wanted to be part of a movement that keeps my country peaceful and protects the constitution.” He and other young people are the driving force behind a growing movement to protect Japan’s supreme law, or constitution, a US-written document that is now being challenged by the demands of an American president. Their movement gained further urgency on Tuesday, when Japan’s government scrapped a ban on exports of lethal weapons – a move seen as a direct challenge to the country’s postwar pacifism. “The constitution enables us to stay out of America’s wars, including in this region,” says Yuri Hioki, at a rally in Tokyo. “The thought that might change makes me really angry”...

For some reason the old peace song "Last Night I Had The Strangest Dream" came to my mind this morning, a song I heard (and sang) often in my youth. Simon and Garfunkel's version of it can be heard here.

“We can never be truly free when other people are not,” Cardinal Brislin on South Africa’s Freedom Day (ACI Africa)

Cardinal Stephen Brislin has called on South Africans celebrating their Freedom Day to be mindful of those who continue to live without true freedom. Freedom Day in South Africa, observed every 27 April, marks the country’s transition from apartheid and white minority rule to a democratic society. It commemorates the historic 1994 elections, when all citizens, regardless of race, were able to vote for the first time. In his message on the important celebration, Cardinal Brislin underscored the importance of freedom and expressed gratitude to God for the freedom South Africa is currently experiencing, especially the freedom of religion. “We can never be truly free when other people are not free, and so while we rejoice in our freedom, we've also got to be in solidarity with those people who do not have the freedom that we enjoy,” Cardinal Brislin said... “Let us not forget where we came from. While we have many problems, challenges in our country, evil things that are happening, we have come from a dreadful system of racism, of apartheid, of the really dehumanization of people, and we are a free country,” he said...

‘First, do no harm’: principles of war and peace (Tablet)

Pope Leo’s observation that “God does not bless any conflict” and that anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, is “never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs”, denies to any nation the attempt to enlist God and override the obligations of Catholic faith and virtues. In his 1899 apostolic letter Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, Pope Leo XIII reminded American Catholics that the Church was not there to conform to the culture and values of the US, but to conform America to the faith and culture of Catholic life in Christ... Pope Leo’s plea of “Peace” where there is no peace should not be misunderstood: the kingdom of peacemakers is not complete until their thirst for righteousness is first satisfied. Beyond conflict, as William the Conqueror dreaded, the pursuit of war must ultimately be overcome with atonement and reconciliation before Christ’s justice can ever be presumed.

Holy See: Wars and extreme climate events have lethal impact on food systems (Vatican News)

The Holy See laments the impact of war, recessions, climate events, and political instability on the world’s agrifood systems, calling for local food systems to keep human dignity at their center...

Kidnapped Nigerian Catholic Priest Freed After Three Months in Captivity, Diocese Credits Sustained Prayer (ACI Africa)

Fr. Nathaniel Asuwaye, the Parish Priest of Holy Trinity Parish of Nigeria’s Kafanchan Catholic Diocese who was kidnapped on February 7 during an attack by gunmen, has regained his freedom after more than three months in captivity. In a statement issued Tuesday, May 12, the Chancellor of the Nigerian Diocese announces “with profound gratitude to God and all who supported us” the release of Fr. Asuwaye. “We are pleased to inform you that Fr Nathaniel is now safe and receiving care. He is in stable condition, remains in good spirits, and appreciates your prayers and support,” Fr. Jacob Shanet says. Fr. Shanet recalls the prayers organized for the Priest’s release following his abduction...

“Stop these nonsense prayers”: Bishop Urges Christians in Nigeria to Speak “the Language of Pentecost” Amid Insecurity (ACI Africa)

Bishop Emmanuel Adetoyese Badejo of Nigeria’s Catholic Diocese of Oyo has called on Christians to invoke the Holy Spirit against violence, kidnapping, and hatred in the West African nation, urging believers to reject what he described as unchristian rhetoric of vengeance and instead embrace “the language of Pentecost: Unity and Love.” In his Pentecost 2026 message shared with ACI Africa on Pentecost Sunday, Bishop Badejo reflected on the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles and linked the Solemnity to Nigeria’s present security and social challenges, including banditry, insurgency, kidnappings, and growing hostility on digital media. “We must ask for the Holy Spirit that rescued Paul and Silas from unjust imprisonment,” the Nigerian Catholic Bishop said, and added, “Pray that the same Spirit, that same divine force, shake down the enclaves that hold God’s children captive in Nigeria and set them free, rendering powerless all their captors and torturers.” The Catholic Bishop appealed for prayers for the conversion of perpetrators of violence in Africa’s most populous nation. “We pray that that same force will bend the hearts of the agents of evil to conversion and to God,” he said... “The Holy Spirit united the world in one language of love”... He urged Christians not to surrender to fear despite Nigeria’s ongoing difficulties... The Nigerian Catholic Church leader strongly criticized prayer expressions that invoke destruction against perceived enemies. “‘Holy Ghost Fire, Back to Sender or Die, Die and Die by Fire’ prayers are not Christian at all,” he said, and added, “People who are praying like this are pagans and are telling us that there is no spirit of God in our churches or in the world.” Bishop Badejo urged Christians to abandon such practices, saying, “Stop these nonsense prayers and begin to speak the language of the Pentecost: Unity and Love.” Referencing St. Paul’s Letter to the Galatians, he said the fruits of the Holy Spirit are “love, joy, peace, patience kindness, goodness, trustfulness, gentleness and self-control.” He also pointed believers to the example of Jesus on the cross...

Woe to mankind, woe to the Nigerian nation if God's Holy Commandment 'Thou shalt not kill," which was proclaimed on Mt Sinai amidst thunder and lighning... is not only broken, but is actually tolerated and permitted to go unpunished by pro Moslem factions."AMDG"

"African values are not for sale" when the bishop Badejo had different thoughts. He claimed an ideological colonization is seeking to destroy the African family. "It's so bad that the United States has made it clear it will not help Nigeria fight the Boko Harem terror group unless the country modifies its laws regarding Homosexuality, family planning and birth control." I suspect the US was led then by Barrack Hussain Obama. Today the US is more than willing to help Catholics in Nigeria defend themselves."AMDG"

"Today, more than ever, without prejudice to the right of self-defense in the strictest sense, it is important to reaffirm that the 'just war' theory, is now outdated." So, with these words coming from Prevost the people of The Catholic Archdiocese of Kaduna in Nigeria have an absolute right to defend themselves against attacks of deadly raids that left five people dead and a number of people abducted on May 21st. This attack was the latest of what the Chancellor called "incessant" Attacks. Nigerians are allowed to defend themselves from the bandits, Jihadists, insurgents, kidnappers, and torturers that have been plagued them for decades."AMDG"

>41 brone: "Today, more than ever, without prejudice to the right of self-defense in the strictest sense, it is important to reaffirm that the 'just war' theory, is now outdated."

I think the key phrase here is "in the strictest sense". Pre-emptive attacks, disproportionate use of violence, escalation of a conflict, targeting whole identity groups because a minority within that group have committed violence, and many other acts often claimed as "self-defence", do not fall into the category of "the right of self-defence in the strictest sense". And the second part of that sentence, "the 'just war' theory, is now outdated" is pretty clear and unequivocal.

Your precept is always observed in an attitude of the mind, namely, that a man should always be prepared not to resist. do we not the allow for times when one must act for the common good. does not violence unchecked lead to the impunity of the aggressor and is not evil then strenthened. I agree a private person should take a nonviolent attitude and act on it as well. A state is a different animal. It has no right to abandon its obligation to defend its citizens using moral means. "If you do wrong, be afraid, for he being the civil authority does not carry the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute His wrath on the evildoer" (Rom 13:4). So, I pray for Nigerians under Moslem persecution who have a righteous cause. I could not pray for their success if war were right or wrong, but relatives of murdered Catholic Nigerians have a righteous cause."AMDG" Free Jimmy Lai.

So I ask what about the killing of noncombatants? It is never morally right to DIRECTLY or intentionally harm non-combatants. However, any deaths that do result from military operations can be justified as indirect or non-intentional. What then is terrorism do these groups like Boko Harem have the intention to kill people and destroy property to create a climate of terror and insecurity, often taking women as hostages. These are considered reasons for just war. I as an ex military man would use "pre-emptive" strikes as a justified defensive measure against this so-called terrorist network. The just war tradition is a valuable source of wisdom for the Catholic African to use as he confronts the enemy of terrorism it is so much better than the extremes of pacifism, with a never-ending hope of temporal peace, and an extreme political realism. This realism leads to despair of earthly justice."AMDG" Free Jimmy Lai.

Nigerian Catholic Diocese Welcomes Convictions in Pentecost Massacre, Says Justice Must Lead to Healing (ACI Africa)

The Catholic Diocese of Ondo has welcomed a court judgment in the case of the 2022 Pentecost Sunday attack on St. Francis Xavier Owo Catholic Parish that left at least 50 people dead, describing the ruling as a significant step toward “justice and accountability.” On June 3, Nigeria’s Federal High Court in Abuja sentenced four men to death by hanging for their role in the attack. The four — Idris Abdulmalik Omeiza, Al Qasim Idris, Jamiu Abdulmalik, and Abdulhaleem Idris — were convicted on multiple counts. A fifth defendant was acquitted for lack of sufficient evidence... “The judgment delivered by the court on June 3, 2026, represents a significant milestone in the pursuit of justice and accountability,” he said... At the same time, he cautioned against viewing justice as revenge and urged Christians to remain guided by the values of truth, justice, mercy, and peace...

That last sentiment is important, and one certainly hopes that the death sentences will be commuted in line with current Catholic thinking.

Hundreds of captives freed from Boko Haram mountain hideout (BBC)

At least 360 people kidnapped by Boko Haram jihadists from a mainly Muslim community in Nigeria's north-eastern Borno state in March have been freed from a remote mountain hideout. The circumstances of how they were freed are disputed. The army says it had launched an unprecedented intelligence-led operation that had been weeks in the planning and taken the Islamist militants by surprise. But a local group, the Borno South Youth Initiative, says it mediated the unconditional release, putting the number of those freed at 416. Mass abductions by armed groups for ransom have become a common tactic in Nigeria in recent years - and though it is illegal to pay ransoms, it does happen... a range of groups across Nigeria now use kidnapping to raise funds, focusing on soft targets such as schools, churches, mosques and remote villages. Analysts say ransom payments by desperate families, intermediaries or, in some cases, state authorities have fuelled the abductions... Samaila Kaigama, president of the Borno South Youth Alliance (Bosaya), told journalists that his group had been advocating for their release and had been in contact with the militants. In a video posted on Facebook he hit out at "government boys" who he said were "claiming glory for our efforts"... growing security threats... are complex, overlapping and include the Islamist insurgency, kidnapping gangs, clashes over land and separatist unrest.

Conflicts are on the rise globally, at the highest level since WWII, data shows (NPR)

If you've been thinking it seems like there are more wars raging in the world these days, it turns out you're right and the data proves it. A new study by researchers at a university in Sweden recorded the highest number of conflicts between states in 2025 since World War II, and the highest number of fatalities recorded since the Rwandan genocide. There were 65 active conflicts in 2025, according to researchers at the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) at Uppsala University, regarded as a leading source of information on violence worldwide. Out of that total, the number of direct conflicts between individual states doubled from the previous year to eight in 2025 — the highest number of such conflicts since UCDP began collecting data in 1946... "We are seeing a clear increase in conflicts between states. For a long time, interstate wars were relatively rare, but developments in recent years point to growing international tensions and a changing global security order"... The rest of the 65 were all intrastate conflicts — government forces fighting rebel groups within the country...

>45 John5918:

“We do not support death penalty”: Nigerian Catholic Bishop Responds to Convictions in 2022 Pentecost Massacre (ACI Africa)

Bishop Jude Ayodeji Arogundade of the Diocese of Ondo in Nigeria has reiterated the Catholic Church’s opposition to capital punishment following the conviction and death sentencing of four men found guilty of participating in the 2022 Pentecost Sunday attack on St. Francis Xavier Catholic Church in Owo that left dozens of worshippers dead. In an interview with ACI Africa on Tuesday, June 9, Bishop Arogundade welcomed the court’s action in pursuing justice for victims of the attack but said the death sentences imposed on the convicted men are inconsistent with the Catholic Church’s defense of human life. “Unfortunately, the Nigerian law has sentenced them to death, and as Catholics, we do not support the death penalty. I am particularly pleased that something eventually was done, but I am pro-life to the core, and I don’t support taking of life,” Bishop Arogundade said...

Chadian Catholic Bishop Calls for Justice, Dialogue amid Herder-Farmer “bloody conflicts” (ACI Africa)

Bishop Dominique Tinoudji of the Catholic Diocese of Pala in Chad has expressed sorrow over renewed violence between herders and farmers in the country’s Mayo-Kebbi East region, calling for justice, dialogue, and solidarity with victims affected by the conflict. In a message issued on Saturday, June 13, the Chadian Catholic Bishop lamented the recurring clashes that have resulted in loss of life, destruction of villages, and the displacement of several families... He lamented, “Once again, bloody conflicts between herders and farmers are causing loss of human life, destroying villages, and forcing many families to flee”... On June 6, at least 11 people were killed in violent clashes between farmers and herders in Chad’s Mayo-Kebbi East region after a herd of cattle reportedly destroyed crops on a farm. The violence, which spread across several villages in the Kim District, also left five people injured and resulted in the burning of homes, forcing residents to flee, raising fresh concerns about escalating tensions between farming and pastoralist communities... “Peace is not achieved through weapons, but through truth and justice that is fair to all,” he emphasized... Addressing Christian communities, parishes, and Catholic Action movement members in his Episcopal See, he warned against allowing fear or hatred to take root amid the violence. “The Gospel calls us to be builders of bridges, not walls of division,” Bishop Tinoudji said...

Note that the bishop refers to the root cause of the conflict, namely tensions between pastoralist herders and settled agriculturalists, rather than characterising it as a religious or ethnic conflict, and also points out that these conflicts cannot be resolved through weapons.

I address my protest to those lovers of peace who very short sightedly, have occasionly adopted it.Always an atttitude which is impatient about details about who did this or that. Yes, they are satified with saying that an enormous calamity or as they say renewed violence (we call that war) has begun by this one or that one. So, what they are saying it seems to me the ole uneducated train operator is this, the calamity of renewed violence (war) has begun by some or all of us you know, farmers, herders, ect and they say or seem to say that this war should be ended by some of us. These people are wrong about all principals of human justice and historic continuity. They are very wrong about their own principles of arbitration and international peace. The sincere peace and highminded peace lover here is always telling us that people no longer settle their quarrels by violence: No longer do we have capital punishment, and there is no need to wage wars. I don't know where youse guys grew up but you perpetually base your peace proposals on the fact that the ordinary guy no longers carries a gun, knife, or bat. You would prevent us from revenging ourselves from the beating of a bat. So, Joe smoe hits his neighbor over the head with a bat, what do we do? You would have us all join hands and sing kumbyeyah. Do we all join hands and dance around the Mulberry bush and as youse guys would have us say "we are all responsible for this; let us hope it will not spread. Let us hope that happy day comes when that man will not be hitting us over the head with his bat and heads will be intact for ever and ever." Then do we say "Ah let bygones be bygones why go back to the,you know, dull details where this all began. Well, my dear pacifists we do go back, and we keep the peace in private life by asking for the facts of provocation, and the proper object of punishment in line with said provocation. So, we do inquire who used the bat first. So we go into dull details, we do inquire into the origins and the truth is terrible, of a spiritual sort."AMDG"

Prevost is forced to approve the agreement between the US and Iran. Prevost has his hands tied by statecraft something he is very inept at. He has to depend on the credibility of the Vatican rather than his Trump Derangement Syndrome. if Prevost refused to approve of the agreement, he would look partisan (Which he is) inconsistent (which he is) and politically reactive (which he is). So, Trump knows the Vatican can be neither anti nor pro Trump it must appear to be above all that. We know Prevost dislikes the optics, but he must approve to maintain the Vatican"s diplomatic neutrality. The anti-American reflex of all leftists here and in Europe and the Vatican secretly wish we failed knowng that an Iranian government has been responsible for mass killings, torture, repression, proxy wars, and terrorism for 47 years. It is American dominance and its defense of dialogue in Iran. It's the tired old "colonizer vs colonized lens these lefties use you guys know the tired old slogans of the Marxist left; The Marxist Missionary uses them all the time. "Global South," "formerly colonized" "imperial power" this framing helps them to downplay the brutality of Iran because thay see Iran as a symbol of resistance to the US. The ideological tunnel vision of these people is that they fear to be lumped in with conservatives who they accuse of wanting war. Or heaven forbid they may be aligned with America who wants to end the dangling of a nuclear warhead over its head and try to end the brutal oppression of their own people. So not approving of the agreement with Iran puts Marxists on the spot. It would create the appearance of siding with a murderous regime."AMDG"