Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The moral myth of the first strike

By Yuri Koszarycz - posted Monday, 13 April 2026


The Gospel offers no room for ambiguity when it comes to violence. While Christ's mandate to love one's enemies is clear on paper, the messy reality of political life often forces leaders into corners where force looks like the only exit. To manage this, the Church developed the "just war" tradition, not as a hall pass for violence, but as a moral cage designed to ensure warfare is strictly a last resort.

Modern geopolitics has tested this framework to its breaking point. Under the Trump administration, the U.S. use of a pre-emptive strike against Iran drew sharp condemnation from religious leaders, echoing the concerns of figures like Pope Leo XIV. Similarly, Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine stands as a contemporary example of aggression that many argue is unjustifiable under Christian moral theology. These actions rely on a "hit them before they hit us" strategy that the Church finds nearly impossible to defend.

The following essay examines why these pre-emptive strikes fail the moral test. By looking at the historical roots established by Augustine and Aquinas, and the modern requirements of the Catechism, we can see why a hypothetical threat is never enough to justify the tragedy of war. When nations trade certainty for speculation, they lose their moral footing and turn "security" into an idol that justifies atrocity.

Advertisement

Where the rules came from

Early Christians were mostly nonviolent. That changed when the religion moved from a persecuted minority to the official faith of the Roman Empire. Suddenly, Christian rulers had to figure out how to run a state without abandoning their souls.

Augustine was the first to make this systematic. He argued that war could be moral only if it was meant to stop evil and restore justice. Violence is never "good". It's just something we might tolerate to protect the innocent. As he put it, the only valid reason to go to war is to find peace.

Aquinas eventually gave those ideas teeth. He laid out three hard conditions in his Summa Theologiae:

  • Legitimate Authority:You don't get to start a war on your own. It has to be declared by those responsible for the common good.
  • Just Cause:The enemy must actually deserve the attack because they did something grave-usually an act of aggression.
  • Right Intention:Your aim must be the restoration of peace, not land grabs or revenge.

Later thinkers added more layers: proportionality, a real chance of winning, and making sure every other option was dead and buried first.

The modern checklist

The Catechism of the Catholic Church doesn't mince words here. It starts with a heavy bias against war. Every citizen and government is flat-out obliged to avoid it. War isn't just another tool in a politician's belt. It's a tragedy you only touch if you have no choice.

Advertisement

The Catechism demands four things happen at the same time before you pull the trigger:

The damage from the aggressor must be lasting, grave, and certain.

  • Every other way to end the conflict has failed.
  • You actually have a serious prospect of success.
  • The war itself can't be worse than the evil you're trying to stop.

If you're the one calling for a fight, the burden of proof is on you.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

7 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Yuri Koszarycz was a Senior Lecturer in the School of Theology, McAuley Campus, Australian Catholic University. He has degrees in philosophy, theology and education and lectured in bioethics, ethics and church history. He has now retired.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Yuri Koszarycz

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 7 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy