Essay About Religious Ethics And Oldest Traditions

Just WarJust WarOne of the oldest traditions in religious ethics is that of the just war. The “Just War Theory” specifies under which conditions war is just. Opposition based on the Just War Theory differs from that of pacifists. Oppositionists oppose particular wars but not all war. Their opposition is based on principals of justice rather than principles of pacifism (Becker 926).

In the monotheistic religious traditions of Christianity and Islam, one role of God (or Allah) is to limit or control aggressions among humankind. In these religious traditions, God establishes an ideal or standard for the righteous use of force by followers of the faith. These standards, or just war traditions, address details of when to use force to solve disputes, to what extent the force should be employed, and whose blessing is required to insure that the use of force is appropriate in the eyes of God. If a situation satisfies the just war tradition in that culture and the aggression is carried out for religious reasons, the action can be further classified as holy war. Many Americans connect the concept of holy war only with Islam. In fact the Christian crusades during the middle ages were just such a holy war being waged by Christians against Muslims. Whether a particular situation qualifies as a holy war or not, the focus of the just war tradition is to ask God for approval. “Appeals to ‘holy war’ or ‘religious crusade’ in one or another tradition are one type of appeal to divine authority regarding the use of force.” In recent history numerous conflicts, border skirmishes, battles and wars have arisen in which governments have decided to apply military force to varying degrees. Inevitably, politicians, policy-makers, religious and military leaders seek divine authority on which to base the struggle of their population and the loss of life. Have religious ethical values or theological aspects of the just war tradition influenced the nature of these military actions? Have the prevailing religious values kept military actions any more humane than they might otherwise have been? This paper will examine the theological roots of the just war tradition in the Christian and Islamic cultures. In addition, it will try to ascertain how religious ethics, and the just war tradition in particular, has been used between the “war” on terror and the United States. Finally, this paper will demonstrate that the true religious doctrines on just or holy war are often misconstrued or left behind when political leaders from predominantly Christian and Islamic nations try to find moral high-ground on which to base their military actions. (Hunt, Crotty)

The Islamic concept of jihad, often mistranslated as “holy war,” plays a strong role in Muslim just war tradition. Jihad more correctly refers to a “holy struggle” or “striving”. Unfortunately, jihad has been used as a means for justifying everything from defense of the right to worship Allah to blatant aggression against neighboring countries. Both Sunni and Shiite Muslim scholars recognize that jihad is a term to be used cautiously, as it seems to be in some sense applicable to fighting anyone whose faith in Allah can be questioned. Political leaders on the other hand have had a tendency to use the term whenever it increases their popularity or their people’s patience for enduring conflict. Iraq is one of numerous Middle Eastern nations that could be classified as dar-al-Islam; a nation in which Muslim law dictates much of everyday life. (Hunt, Crotty)

On the other hand, the United States can be classified as a predominantly Christian nation if not by ethical values, then by population. While the significance of the Christian ethics of just war in the response to the invasion of Afghanistan and the Middle East could certainly be questioned, public opinion in the United States was much more clearly affected by Christian ethics. Numerous Christian organizations in the United States expressed deep concern to the government about the dangers of retaliatory aggression and of wrong intentions.

In Islamic tradition, just war theory rests in jihad. Unfortunately the term itself is somewhat elusive in nature. On the most fundamental level, Islamic states denounce any war other than jihad, and in the loosest sense jihad is defined as a holy struggle. The term is almost analogous to the phrase “just war” in English. The term’s elusive nature stems from the inconsistency with which it is applied to an act of military aggression. In the situation of the Christian Crusades, Muslims called for a jihad to repel Christians moving into the Islamic Ummah and killing Muslims as heretics. This action would clearly have been in defense of the faith, which seems to be where the Koran draws a line. Aggression to protect the religion or people’s right to practice it takes precedence over other kinds of conflict (Kelsay & Johnson). In addition there

s a general ambiguity of the definition of religion that comes with the fact that the term ‡just war” is actually used in contexts with the worst possible conditions
 including, the Western world. The Quran provides a wide range of opinions regarding the meaning of the term.

In Islamic tradition, just war theory rests in jihad. Unfortunately the term itself is somewhat elusive in nature. On the most fundamental level, Islamic states denounce any war other than jihad, and in the loosest sense jihad is defined as a holy struggle. The term is almost analogous to the phrase “just war” in English. The term’s elusive nature stems from the inconsistency with which it is applied to an act of war. In the situation of the Christian Crusades, Muslims called for a jihad to repel Christians moving into the Islamic Ummah and killing Muslims as heretics. This action would clearly have been in defense of the faith, which seems to be where the Koran draws a line. Aggression to protect the religion or people’s right to practice it takes precedence over other kind of conflict (Kelsay & Johnson). In addition thereis a general ambiguity of the definition of religion that comes with the fact that the phraseor.