The Just War Revisited

Current Issues in Theology

by Oliver O'Donovan

Leading political theologian Oliver O'Donovan here takes a fresh look at some traditional moral arguments about war. Modern Christians differ widely on this issue. A few hold that absolute pacifism is the only viable Christian position, others subscribe in various ways to concepts of 'just war' developed out of a Western tradition that arose from the legacies of Augustine and Aquinas, while others still adopt more pragmatically realist postures. Professor O'Donovan re-examines questions of contemporary urgency including the use of biological and nuclear weapons, military intervention, economic sanctions, war crimes trials and the roles of the Geneva Convention, international conventions and the UN. His enquiry opens with a challenging dedication to the new Archbishop of Canterbury and proceeds to shed new light on vital topics with which the Archbishop and others will be very directly engaged. It should be read by anyone concerned with the ethics of warfare.

Genres: Theology, Politics, Philosophy

152 pages, Kindle Edition

First published October 15, 1999

About the author

Oliver O'Donovan FBA FRSE (born 1945) is a scholar known for his work in the field of Christian ethics. He has also made contributions to political theology, both contemporary and historical.

Reviews

[Michi · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 Stars.

O‘Donovan writes so dense that he never wastes your time with unnecessary sentences. But he writes so dense that it still takes forever to fully understand the argument he is making.
All in all, it is the best and most nuanced account of just-war reasoning I have read so far!

“The rejection of war, then, is no demand of natural law. It is a distinctively evangelical rejection. Christians refused to go along with this controlled recognition of antagonistic praxis and its associated virtues…
The evangelical counter-praxis to war, then, amounts to this: armed conflict can and must be re-conceived as an extraordinary extension of ordinary acts of judgment; it can and must be subject to the limits and disciplines of ordinary acts of judgment. In the face of criminal warmaking, judgment may take effect through armed conflict, but only as armed conflict is conformed to the law-governed and law-generating shape of judgment.”

[Squolle]

Ordnung, Naturrecht, Autorität, Proportionalität...
Nette Theorie, hat leider wenig mit der Realität zu tun. An vielen Stellen theoretisch sauber argumentiert.
Im letzten Kapitel reflektiert er über seinen Stand als Autor, der keine Autorität für konkrete Vorschläge und Maßnahmen beanspruchen kann. Die just-war Theorie sei nur ein Werkzeug zum Denken.
Yoah... vielleicht nächstes mal nen besseres Werkzeug aus der Garage holen. Finds nach wie vor ne seltsame Form der Theoriebildung. Hab den Eindruck, es gibt andere Ansätze über Friedensethik nachzudenken, die vielversprechender sind.

[Nathaniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Loss of this deliberative perspective in the modern world has helped to empty the citizen’s responsibilities of practical significance, reducing us all to the status of amateur journalists and commentators. ‘Are you in favour of, or against, United States policy?’ That is the only form, apparently, in which a moral question about war can ever be put, even to those of us who are supposedly citizens of other countries which have their own policies. As soon as the first hint of future conflict passes across the airwaves, we are all on hand with our own editorials, condemning or supporting the hostilities before a shot has been fired, castigating the United States or being loyal to it, vigorously promoting that polarisation of public opinion which in our wiser moments we deplore. The opinionated public constitutes a positive obstacle to deliberation about the praxis of judgment. It does the opposite of what citizens of a state at war ought to do, which is to deliberate with their government and army, so providing a sounding-board for the serious exercise of judgment on alternative courses of action. A deliberating public would move forward with its military and political representatives from situation to situation, treating each next decision as different from the last one, listening to reasons with an open mind and asking demanding questions about the explanations offered, bearing in mind that there is much it cannot know, but also that there is much they cannot know either. A deliberating public would keep the scope for judgment open at each step, not foreclosing future history with a stonking battery of Yes or No let fire on Day Minus One. A deliberating public would elicit a more conscientious performance from its representatives, political and military. And a deliberating public would observe much more sharply if the point were reached at which those representatives stepped outside the praxis of judgment and reverted to the lawless extravagances of antagonistic confrontation. The worst crimes in war tend to be committed later in its course, when patience and discipline have worn thin. But by the time the leaders of the nations are driven to resort to the worst excesses of wickedness, the public has so exhausted its rhetorical resources that it is liable to let the fact pass without notice" (pp. 17-18).

[Christopher Pokorny · Rating 3 out of 5]

O'Donovan provides a solid text on re-engaging Just War Theory. Those who have never read anything on just war might want to consult a primer before engaging.

[Daphyne · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely the most carefully argued book I’ve ever read on Just War Theory. It takes a while to get used to his writing style though so plan on going slowly through the first essay. This is college level reading.

It also hasn’t been updated since 2003 and I’d love to read any further commentary he’s made on more recent conflicts.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

a very well written and well thought out book about the theory of just war in the 21st century. unfortunately, i think he is for the most part wrong in that he thinks a lot of wars are just when they aren't -- but his theological thoughts and understanding of the late scholastics is something impressive!