Joseph Cardinal Höffner CHRISTIAN SOCIAL ... - Ordo Socialis

sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed“ (Gen 9:6). „It is not without purpose
that the ruler carries the sword; he is God’s servant, to inflict his avenging wrath upon the
wrongdoer“ (Rom l3:4). The Church’s Magisterium has indeed fought against blood vengeance,
but nevertheless recognized the governmental authority’s right of the sword. Pope Innocent
III (ll98-l2l6) prescribed the following declaration to the Waldensians: „We declare that
the governmental authority can impose the death penalty without serious sin, presupposing
that this penalty is imposed, not out of hate, but on the basis of judgment, not arbitrarily, but
after mature reflection.“ On September l3, l952, Pius XII declared that it is reserved to the
public authority „to deprive the condemned of their lives as reparation for their crimes after
they have already forfeited their right to life through their crimes.“
b) The state’s right of the sword is a forceful recognition of the inviolability of the highest
human goods, particularly of human life. The sanctity of the divine order is proved ‘mighty’
even in this age by the death penalty. The death penalty is an act of self-defense on the part of
the state. Its justification is ultimately grounded in the fact that the common good cannot be
preserved in any other way.
c) The right of the state to impose the death penalty does not imply that the state is not allowed
to renounce the exercise of this right. Whether the state can renounce the imposition of
the death penalty depends on the prevailing conditions, i.e., on the needs of the common good
as occasioned by these conditions. Since the modern state generally disposes of a ready police
force and safe prisons, there are more reasons today for the renunciation of the death penalty
than in the Middle Ages. But here, of course, it must be considered that dangerous criminals
are not infrequently freed by their accomplices through kidnapping and the seizure of hostages
and then continue their evil deeds.
3. War and Peace.
The teaching of the Catholic theological tradition on war is fundamentally a doctrine of peace.
a) Christian tradition on war and peace
In terms of the history of ideas, the most influential compilation of medieval teaching on war
and peace is found in Gratian’s Decree (ll39-ll42). Here one finds the discussion of the Old
Testament ethics of war. Here the relevant passages of the New Testament are cited. Here the
Church Fathers and the popes find a hearing. Here one perceives above all what a dominating
influence Augustine exercised on the doctrine of war and peace. Gratian adduces these words
of Augustine: „Were Christian doctrine to place all wars under sin, the gospel would have
answered those soldiers who asked for counsel concerning the salvation of their souls that
they should throw away their weapons and withdraw entirely from active duty. But it was said
to them: ‘Practice violence and deceit on no one, and be content with your pay.’” 20
For Gratian, the words of Augustine are the decisive statement on just war: those wars are just
„that avenge injustice.“ 21 As in the case of the death penalty, it is ultimately a question of selfdefense.
Thomas Aquinas took up the ethics of war from the Gratian Decree and brought it into a systematic
order. Three conditions, he writes, must be fulfilled in order for a war to be just. First,
only the rightful governmental authority is entitled to wage war. Private wars, i.e., wars between
intranational groups, are not allowed. Second, there must be a just cause for war,
namely, the unjust conduct of the opponent. Third, a war may only be waged with the right
attitude, namely, intending „the advancement of good, or the avoidance of evil.“ As St.
Augustine correctly explained: „The passion for inflicting harm, the cruel thirst for venge-
20 Decretum Gratiani (Venice, 1615), Pars II, Causa XXIII, qu. 1, c. 2 „Paratus,“ pag. 1209.
21 Ibid., Causa XXIII, qu. 2, c. 2 „Dominus noster,“ pag. 1208.
141