Pope Francis, a leading advocate of Doormat Christianity, is at it again, trying to reverse nearly two millennia of Christian doctrine, by preaching total passivity—even against violent aggression.
On March 18, 2022, Francis declared before an audience that “A war is always—always!—the defeat of humanity, always. We, the educated, who work in education, are defeated by this war, because on another side we are responsible.”
So far, all well and good, if only because such lofty but impotent words are expected.
But then Francis went so far as to say that, “There is no such thing as a just war: they do not exist!”
That is a remarkably dangerous claim, one that, if embraced—as no doubt it is by millions of similar naïve thinkers—can easily lead to their annihilation.
There is, indeed, such a thing as a just war—the only rational way of responding to unjust wars—and it is firmly grounded in Christian, especially Catholic, teaching, even if the head of the Catholic world argues otherwise.
In fact, from the very start, Christian theologians had concluded that “the so called charity texts of the New Testament that preached passivism and forgiveness, not retaliation, were firmly defined as applying to the beliefs and behavior of the private person [and not the state],” to quote historian Christopher Tyerman.
Christ himself—who called on his followers to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s (Matt. 22:21)—differentiated between the social and spiritual realms. In the only recorded instance of Jesus being slapped, he did not “turn the other cheek,” but rather challenged his slapper to explain himself (John 18:22–23). The Nazarene further praised a Roman centurion without calling on him to “repent” by resigning from one of the most brutal militaries in world history (Matt. 8: 5–13). Similarly, when a group of soldiers asked John the Baptist how they should repent, he advised them always to be content with their army wages (Luke 3:14)—and said nothing about their quitting the Roman army.
This is because there is “no intrinsic contradiction,” continues Tyerman, “in a doctrine of personal, individual forgiveness condoning certain forms of necessary public violence to ensure the security in which, in St. Paul’s phrase, Christians ‘may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty’ (1 Tim. 2:2).”
Or in the words of that chief articulator of Just War theory, Saint Augustine (354–430), “It is the injustice of the opposing side that lays on the wise man the duty to wage war.” Crusades historian Jonathan Riley-Smith elaborates:
What was evil in war itself? Augustine had asked. The real evils were not the deaths of those who would have died anyway, but the love of violence, cruelty, and enmity; it was generally to punish such that good men undertook wars in obedience to God or some lawful authority…. Expeditions to the Levant, North Africa, or the Iberian Peninsula could be justified as responses to present Muslim aggression or as rightful attempts to recover Christian territory which had been injuriously seized in the past. [For more on the intricacies of just war theory, especially as compared and contrasted with unjust wars, which do merit condemnation, read “Just War vs. Just Plain Old Jihad.”]
Make no mistake: without just wars and the brave men who undertook them, the world today would be a very different place. Europe, for instance, would have been Islamic—and not by willingly capitulating, as it is now, but by force: countless jihads were waged against it and other Christian nations; and they were repulsed only by the force of arms—by war, just war.
Indeed, even the Vatican itself, whence Pope Francis issues his lofty words of peace and love, has long been targeted and even attacked (for example in 846) by Muslims, and was saved only thanks to men acting in accordance with just war theory.
There is nothing wrong with Pope Francis’s generic condemnation of war and its horrors. It is his usual lack of distinction—in this case, conflating just with unjust wars—that is problematic, if not suicidal.
See Ibrahim’s new book, Defenders of the West: The Christian Heroes Who Stood Against Islam, for more on just war theory in action.
I don’t follow Vatican II that even the clergy at the time said it had errors in it. I do not follow a Pope that pushes paganism, and other things – basically a modernist (communist infiltrator). (Read: Infiltration, and there are other books talking about the infiltration of communists into not only the Secular world but the churches – including the protestant churches too. BTW, tell Francis to get rid of his guards around his place!!!
Thanks for the article and for what you do to keep us informed!!
Jesus preached this: “When someone strikes you on your right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.” (Matthew 5:38-40). The Pope is simply carrying this teaching to its logical extreme. Only it is not logical and it is very extreme. The only logical outcome from turning the other cheek to our enemy in war is that you will be struck again, and likely it will be even harder and more damaging. Whatever the Pope has in mind, if we follow this advise, it will not end for us.
If you understand the culture of the day the “slap on the cheek” is an insult, not necessarily “punch to the face”. As I understand it, the whole point of the teaching is you can not react to insults.
Whew!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Well, I dodged one. I am happy I am Lutheran.
White Christian Countries should Not be Fighting .
‘Turn the other cheek’ is a personal doctrine and not a civil doctrine or a foreign policy doctrine. e.g. A cop has no right to turn the other cheek when making an arrest, and a judge has no right to turn the other cheek when sentencing an offender found guilty or liable in the course of a trial.
Turn the other cheek applies to interpersonal relationships between individuals.
A good example of ‘turn the other cheek’ today is in Covid-1984 relationships. All of the jabbed members of a family should forgive their unjabbed relatives for ‘killing’ everyone with their magical super-spreader power. And all of the unjabbed members of a family should forgive their jabbed relatives for believing that nonsense and blaming them for Fauci’s and Big Pharma’s crimes. That’s the point of the doctrine. It’s not about civil doctrines of law and order or foreign policies handled by the powerful. Turn the other cheek has no affect upon domestic security (police) or external security (war).
One would think Antipope Frank would bother to read the Bible, but one would be wrong.
God bless everyone here.
Well put Dan and with a little poke at our great medical leader, well deserved.
You are absolutely right Dan. And as Raymond Ibrahim explains ‘”the so-called charity texts of the New Testament that preached passivism and forgiviness, not retaliation, were firmly defined as applying to the beliefs and behaviour of the private person’ and not the state, explains Christopher Tyerman” (Sword and Scimitar:132). When you have obligation to others, children for example or indeed anyone, you have the right of defense to protect them otherwise you yourself are party to the violence.
Thanks Raymond, a necessary doctrine to explain on occasion. You can’t stand up for the widow and the orphan if you won’t stand up to those who oppress them.
If the good man of the house had known at what time the thief would come…he would have locked the door.
Can’t remember where I read it but “supposedly”, the Ayatollah said of the Biden administration, “This American President will surrender to me.”
Here’s another one I like, don’t know who said it:
We sleep peacefully in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night, to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
So many examples of oppression going on worldwide currently, they are too many to mention, as Raymond’s monthly series proves.
I’ll stop with that.
Thanks again Raymond
Is Pope Francis even a Christian? I think not. He is a symptom of abandoned faith.
His words and deeds are not those of a Catholic pope.
“Francis” as he likes to be called, is a Jesuit and a Communist. Yes, Communist. The Marxist/Leninist type. He is evil and a promoter of evil. If he is NOT the False Prophet of Revelation, then he is trying out very hard for the role.