Catholic Exchange

Early Christians on Pacifism and Military Force

There is a persistent claim that the early Christians were pacifists—in the strong sense of being opposed to all use of violence—and that it was not until the time of the Emperor Constantine that this began to change.

After Christianity became the official religion of the empire, the Church embraced the use of military force, with St. Augustine playing the part of the enabling villain, who came up with the idea of the just war.

This story plays with well-worn tropes: the fall from original innocence into corruption, the idea that Constantine corrupted the Church, that the Christianization of the empire was a bad thing, etc.

You may notice that these same tropes are often used in anti-Catholic apologetics stemming from the Protestant Reformation. That’s not surprising, since these tropes were needed to justify separation from the Church at the time of the Reformation.

It’s also not surprising that, relying on these same tropes, the denominations that historically have been strongly pacifistic stemmed from the Protestant community.

Most Protestants, of course, are not pacifists and recognize the legitimate use of military force, and there is a good reason for that: Protestants are the majority in many countries, just as Catholics are in others, and so they have been confronted with the task of ensuring the safety of their nations.

No nation can be safe if it is unwilling to use military force to defend itself. If, in the present, fallen state of the world, a nation were to suddenly renounce the use of military force and beat its swords into ploughshares, it would suffer a dire fate.

Either:

  • It would be conquered by its external enemies,
  • Its internal, criminal element would overrun it and turn it into a failed state,
  • Its more sensible-minded citizens would stage a coup and re-establish a government willing to use force to defend the nation, or
  • It would depend for its defense on another country that is less scrupulous about the use of force.

Any way you go, pacifism is not a stable, self-sustaining enterprise. It’s a dangerous world out there, and pacifists depend for their safety and security on the generosity and good will of non-pacifists.

Prior to the Christianization of the Roman empire, many Christians were not faced with the responsibility of defending the public and ensuring public order. As a result, some authors of this period had the luxury of entertaining pacifistic ideals without having to worry about keeping people safe.

But were they all in this condition? What about those Christians who were in the military?

What about the era of the New Testament itself? What attitude toward military service did it take?

Is the idea of a uniformly pacifist early Church accurate? Or does it distort what actually happened?

Here’s a video in which I take on the subject.

Comments

One response to “Early Christians on Pacifism and Military Force”

  1. jmc Avatar
    jmc

    When you consider Christ,s answer to the soldier – be satisfied with your pay and don’t bully anyone – there’s absolutely no grounds to think that the use of military force is always wrong. Today’s Christians in the Middle East would certainly argue that point! It takes a certain cold-heartedness for anyone, individual or nation, to stand by and do nothing, to refuse to get involved, when someone is being threatened.
    .
    I am reminded rather forcefully of an incident in the mid-1960s when a young woman was raped in front of a whole crowd of people, and not one of them moved to rescue that poor girl – and, worse, not one of them consented to be a witness! It was a scandal that made headlines all over the nation at the time. I was quite young, young enough that I had no clue what “rape” actually was, only that it was a serious crime. It rocked my world, and not in a good way. For a child who is raised always to be willing to go to bat for others, to suddenly discover that others will not extend the same help to you in your need…there’s no word strong enough to describe the shock involved.
    .
    It certainly brought home to me a lesson I’d recently learned in catechism. Killing someone is not a sin if it is necessary to protect yourself or others from harm…in fact, in the case of protecting others especially, killing may actually be a duty. At the time, I took that to refer to people like police and soldiers, but that incident made me see how it could fall even to me to be the one to take someone’s life to protect another. All this at the age of seven or eight.
    .
    Peace is certainly a worthy goal, but like everything else in our fallen race, pacifism can become a sin if carried too far.

Leave a Reply