The Theology Of Self-Defence-The Church’s Oficial Position - Catholic Herald
Catholic Herald
  • Home
  • Cover Story
  • Editorial
  • Archbishopric
  • News
    • Vatican News
  • Homily
  • Kids &Teens
  • Gallery
    • Gallery
No Result
View All Result
Catholic Herald
No Result
View All Result
Home Matters of the Moment

The Theology Of Self-Defence-The Church’s Oficial Position

by admin
March 21, 2020
in Matters of the Moment
0
547
SHARES
1.6k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

It is not a new knowledge that in re-
cent times, there have been attempts

to persecute the Christian faithful in
major fronts characterized in the acts
made within the spirit of secularism,

relativism and extreme form of Hu-
manism; to Islamize the world and

more specifically in the sub-Saharan

Africa to deep the Qur’an into the At-
lantic. In the light of this the death toll

of Christian adherents have increased
in its number and nobody not even

the leaders are doing anything to rem-
edy the situation.

Sequel to the above this write-up

focuses on, and presents the theo-
logico-ecclesial interpretation of the

concept of self-defense, wherein the
hitherto misunderstood concept of
self-defense is re-clarified, and its

implications as well as indispensa-
bility (when judged necessary) and

germaneness is introduced to a first
time reader. These it hopes to achieve
through an initial exploration of both
the mundane and ecclesial notions of

self-defense; exposition of the misin-
terpretation vis-à-vis misappropria-
tion and its genesis in a wanton Bibli-
cism and naïve Biblical Literalism. The

relevance of this piece is to be situat-
ed in the need to educate the already

threatened Christian populace on the
right notion of self-defence; on the
need for self-defence and on the right
code of conduct to place them in the
right mind-set to pursue self-defence
legally and morally.

BIBLICISM AND NAÏVE BIBLI-
CAL LITERALISM – THE GENESIS

OF DILEMMA, CONTROVERSY
AND VULNERABILITY.
Biblical literalism refers to some
form of a reductive interpretation of
the scriptures, wherein there is a strict
adherence to the exactitude of letters

or the literal sense of the scriptures re-
gardless of the figurative, metaphorical

and contextual implication of words

and expressions. On the other hand,
especially in this context, Biblicism
refers to the elevation of the Bible to
the status of a deity and a consequent
worship of it, often accompanied by
the literalism. This becomes naïve in

character when it happens in an inno-
cent-ignorance.

In an unreflective mode, Biblical Lit-
eralist who are of the extreme and ab-
solute pacifist camp find enough rea-
sons from the above excerpts to back

up their positions against the taking
of life for whatever reasons, contexts
and situations. The relative pacifist

as much as they enthrone the sacred-
ness and dignity of human life, they

allow for some passive violent way of
defending life even if it means taking
another’s life. The basic questions thus
becomes; was Christ advocating for

extreme pacifism? Can one apply vio-
lence or take another life in the service

of self-defense? The answer to these
questions must necessarily proceed
from an understanding of the above
biblical excerpt within the context and

times they were made. Here it is nec-
essary to call to mind that the Bible is

not just about a book but primarily
about a person- Jesus Christ, about his

words, actions, contexts and circum-
stances. Hence, one would not be out

of place to ask- what would Jesus do if
he were to live in these present times
of incessant persecution and maiming
of Christians and yet preach the gospel
to the ends of the earth?
THE CHURCH’S POSITION ON
SELF-DEFENCE.
Self-defense is a countermeasure
that involves defending the health and
wellbeing of oneself from harm. The
Catholic Encyclopedia gives a more
specific definition of self-defense as

“the right of a private person to em-
ploy force against anyone who unjust-
ly attacks his life or person, his prop-
erty or good name.”

It is to be mentioned that from the

earliest times, as can be gleaned from
the writings of the Apostles, Church

Fathers and the Church’s Magiste-
rium, the Church is clear that kill-
ing another human being is always a

grave issue and should never be taken
lightly. This teaching according to the
Church remains for all time. This is
even evidenced in the practice by the
early Christians of the ancient Roman
empire of renouncing service in the
military before baptism as a means to
forestalling the shedding of Blood by a
neophyte Christian.

From the medieval times, especial-
ly since the Church always reforms

herself, (not in the core doctrines or
elements divinely instituted and of
what makes her what she is but in
her discipline), taking note of times
and context in different epochs thus,

adapting herself to them, she recog-
nizes that Violence may thus be jus-
tified in the service of self-defense

even to the point of killing an unjust

aggressor. Leaning on Aquinas’ argu-
ment for legitimate self-defense the

Church instructs, that “Love toward

oneself remains a fundamental prin-
ciple of morality. Therefore it is legiti-
mate to insist on respect for one’s own

right to life. Someone who defends his
life is not guilty of murder even if he
is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal
blow. Pope St. John Paul II would later
reaffirm this position when he averred
that “the demanding commandment
of love of neighbour, set forth in the

Old Testament and confirmed by Je-
sus, itself presupposes love of oneself

as the basis of comparison…. In other
words, loving one’s neighbor means
nothing if you don’t first love yourself
in a rightly ordered way. Little wonder
why Jesus says, “Love your neighbor as
yourself.”
In confusion one may ask, is the
church not however erroneous in this

conclusion since Christ clearly for-
bids revenge and taking of another’s

life. The answer to this lies in Thom-
as Aquinas’ resolution of this genuine

paradox, in his Summa Theological,
II-II, 64, art. 7. Hence heargues:
It is written (Exod. Xxii.2): If a thief

be found breaking into a house or un-
dermining it, and be wounded so as to

die; he that slew him shall not be guilty
of blood. Now it is much more lawful
to defend one’s life than one’s house.
Therefore neither is a man guilty of

murder if he kill (sic) another in de-
fense of his own life.

Prior to the above, Aquinas estab-
lishes that “by sinning man departs

from the order of reason, and conse-
quently falls away from the dignity of

his manhood, in so far as he is natu-
rally free, and exists for himself, and

he falls into the slavish state of the
beast.” Hence in so far as someone

embarks on a journey to harm anoth-
er, he immediately divorces of himself

the claim to life and as such incurs the
treatment proper to brutes.

It follows rightly then, that Chris-
tians are empowered to defend them-
selves in the wake of threats and as-
saults, not so much only as a right but

as a duty one owes himself and the

creator, since one is only but a custo-
dian of his/her life. In this wise, if one

is left only with an option of not spar-
ing an unjust aggressor, a Christian

may take such life and be not liable
to it. In such scenario, the protection
of one’s life becomes an imperative. It
must also be noted that the instinct of
self-preservation is based on the fact
that life is a good given to us by God.

Since we have an intrinsic and funda-
mental right to live, therefore, we also

have a right to defend ourselves. As a
matter of fact, “no one can renounce
the right to self-defense out of lack of
love for life or for self.”
However in outlining the grounds
for the legitimate employment of
self-defense, the Church teaches that
Self-defense, does not preclude the law

against the intentional killing of an-
other since in self-defense, the killing

of an unjust aggressor is in fact unin-
tended-CCC 2263. She as well recom-
The world is full of many people with

hardened hearts. They are hardened by
the harsh circumstances of their lives.

Their lives have no other outlet for infor-
mation to update themselves and come

out from their negative way of seeing
things. Life must be hard but there is no

way we can curse tomorrow for tomor-
row ushers new hope, new understanding

of things. There is no way man can stag-
nate himself or be trapped by negative

circumstances of his life, an unrealistic
way of looking at the wonderful world
full of people who have made it and who
are making it in life.
How can the hardened circumstances of
our life make us carve out our own world
by not seeing the world as progressive
world full of wonders of God and people
making it in life? The bridges we cross
everyday are they not built by people like
us? The electricity we are enjoying today
is it not the positive thought of a person

like us? Bitter experiences of life should
not make us feel that it is the end of life.
In a country where power is recycled
and money is in the hands of the old and
poverty in the land, justice may not go

around. Justice must spread to avoid peo-
ple asking questions in the midst of the

rich. How do you tell the poor that God is
their Father too?
What about those who have overcome
the circumstances of their life and they are
making it in life? They become captains
of industries, technocrats and they are at
the peak on the ladder of success?How
do they accommodate those who are at
the lower ladder as they are climbing to

be there like them? Is it because they suf-
fered before they achieved such? Why do

they develop hardened heart and prevent
others to be successful like them? There
are many apprentices who worked for
their masters for many years and their

masters did not reward them for work-
ing under them and helping them to start

their own business. Many of them are

stranded looking for compassionate peo-
ple to uplift them. Many of them felt that

their masters have locked their destiny.
Nobody has such power to tamper with
someone’s destiny. Those who do not
believe in God and who do not want to

work hard to overcome the circumstanc-
es of their lives think that someone can

tamper with their destiny. What a trash!
Jesus is calling technocrats, business
magnates, and politicians to shut the
doors of pride, injustice, oppression and
reorganize humanity in justice, harmony

and peace. All the stolen wealth recov-
ered should be redistributed to lessen

the hardship imposed on people by the
economy not moving in proper direction.
Proper governance based on compassion
for all should be strived at. Nepotism and
tribalism should be eliminated to achieve
that oneness. Nigerians should address

the old issues that caused disunity but
are still under the carpet. These issues

are yearning for serious attention. Com-
passionate leadership is needed and not

nepotistic leadership. The church is won-
derful in this area, a sanctuary for all.

All of us must expand the boundary of
compassion in the country, in the states

and local governments in our neighbor-
hoods. In the neighborhood we see many

people wounded by injustice, the persons
denied of their pensions and no means of
livelihood we are to accommodate them.
Not only accommodating them but give

them skills and also know what wound-
ed them in order to help them fight and

defeat the sources of their wounds. Those

in power should know how to build coa-
lition instead of building walls. The judi-
ciary should be the hope of the poor. We

need people who have governed before
to believe that others can do it and even
better than them.
Be compassionate and not hardened

mends that in employing self-defense,

the use of more violence than is nec-
essary in a situation is unlawful. If in

some scenarios, violence and killing in
self-defense can be avoided then to do

otherwise than this would be immor-
al. In more practical terms, this would

imply that it is immoral to kill one
who may have stolen a loaf of bread in
order to eat and survive or to kill one
who merely slaps your cheek. These
would amount to applying a more
than necessary violence.
In addition to the duty to protect
one’s life, the church instructs that it is
as well a grave moral duty to protect
the lives of others. “For this reason,

those who legitimately hold authori-
ty also have the right to use arms to

repel aggressors against the civil com-
munity entrusted to their responsibili-
ty.-CCC 2265” This however goes with

the usual caveat to make an initial
attempt to avoiding violence before
using force and the employment of a
proportionate force. Thus from this,
it follows that even religious leaders
as much as civil leaders have a moral
duty when germane to defend the lives
of her adherents even when it means
that arms are employed.
Finally the concept of self-defense is
a delicate issue that must be handled
with diligence. It is a counsel and not
a commandment; hence individual
consciences shall always play a part in
its interpretation and decide contexts

of appropriation in so far as the con-
science is rightly formed.

Share219Tweet137Share55
admin

admin

  • Trending
  • Comments
  • Latest

The 12 Articles of the Creed

June 14, 2021

Examination malpractices: Who is to blame?

July 10, 2021

Act right, don’t be part of those destroying the world today!

June 14, 2021

Agenda for in-coming Lagos State Governor

0

Fathers And The Omugwo Train

0

Married Pentecostal Pastor Set To Become Catholic Priest

0

New successor of St. Peter: Meet Pope Leo XIV

May 12, 2025

Priestly dignity: JDPC Director advocates supportive environment

May 12, 2025

Workers’ Day: A stark reality of economic hardship

May 12, 2025
Catholic Herald

© 2024 | Xebrian

Navigate Site

  • Home
  • Mixed Grill
  • Interview Section
  • Spirituality
  • Sports
  • Health
  • Technology
  • Gallery
  • Back Page
  • Contact

Follow Us

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Cover Story
  • Editorial
  • Archbishopric
  • News
    • Vatican News
  • Homily
    • Spirituality
  • Mixed Grill
  • Interview Section
  • Sports
  • Technology
  • Health
  • Kids &Teens
  • Gallery
    • Gallery
  • Back Page
  • Contact

© 2024 | Xebrian