Dorothy-Day-SQUARE-photo-by-Bob-Fitch-via-Jim-Forest (1)

From Just War to Catholic Pacifism

Over the centuries, the Catholic Church had evolved from non-violence to a "just war" doctrine. Dorothy Day responded with a new pacifist theology.
Editor’s Note: This is an excerpt of War By Other Means by Daniel Akst; published by Melville House, 2022

Photo of Dorothy Day

From the beginning, The Catholic Worker was hostile to militarism. Early editions attacked the international arms race and criticized such related phenomena as German anti-Semitism. In October 1933, Dorothy Day announced that Catholic Workers, as “representatives of Catholic pacifism,” would attend a meeting of the communist-linked Congress Against War, and this spark, it has been suggested, ignited a meaningful Catholic pacifism in America. There were many other such sparks within the pages of Day’s newspaper, which increasingly reflected her view that war was a forbidden abomination.

In October 1934, an unsigned article, “The Mystical Body of Christ,” probably by Day herself, asserted that humans are all part of Christ and that war is a disease that weakens this collective body. In 1935, the paper condemned the use of poison gas in war and talked about conscientious objection. In March of that year, The Catholic Worker published a curious little article by a radical priest named Paul Hanley Furfey entitled “Christ and the Patriot,” which took the form of a dialogue between Jesus and a nationalist defender of a just war. Again and again, Jesus repeats, in different ways, that we must turn the other cheek and resist violence. “Publication of the dialogue,” says Day biographer Jim Forest, “is the first clear indication in The Catholic Worker of Dorothy’s conviction that following Jesus required the renunciation of hatred and killing.” 

In May of 1936, on its third birthday, the newspaper came right out with it, publishing a dramatic editorial by Day called “Pacifism” that began: “The Catholic Worker is sincerely a pacifist paper.” It takes heroism to be a pacifist, Day asserted, and those who would tread that road should study and prepare. “A pacifist even now,” she wrote, “must be prepared for the opposition of the next mob who thinks violence is bravery.” The editorial reflects Day’s evolution; like her radical friends, she opposed the Great War because she imagined it was nothing more than a struggle over profits—or a scam to create them. Now, as a Catholic since 1926, her objections to war were religious: “My absolute pacifism stems purely from the gospel.”

It takes heroism to be a pacifist.

From here on, Forest reports, “the paper increasingly voiced this unfamiliar position, which many Catholics found shocking and possibly heretical.” That this should be so is a measure of the great distance the Catholic Church has traveled over time, for early Christians interpreted Christ’s actions and teachings as prohibiting violence. “Put away your sword,” he told Peter, “for whoever lives by the sword shall perish by the sword.” Many persecuted Christians died without defending themselves (and some died for refusing military service). But over time, the increasingly established church made its peace with armed conflict, even launching holy wars. Woven into a network of fractious European monarchies across the continent, Roman Catholic religious authorities learned to go along with the home team. In America, perhaps to signal loyalty out of a desire for acceptance by a largely Protestant nation, Catholic clergy were especially ready to support the nation’s wars, even if Irish, Italian, and other American Catholics sometimes felt the tug of allegiance to the old country.

The early church’s pacifism long past, Catholic theologians over the centuries developed a doctrine of “just war” to provide a moral and intellectual framework, in the light of the Gospel, for when Catholics should fight. St. Augustine, for example, recognized that war was horrible but sometimes necessary and “justified only by the injustice of the aggressor.” Thomas Aquinas laid out three criteria for a just war: it has to be waged by a legitimate authority, the cause must be just, and it must be fought with the right intentions (to advance good and prevent evil).

The Catholic conception of the just war has evolved since then and is expressed in the Catechism, which lays out four conditions:

— the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
— all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
— there must be serious prospects of success;
— the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

The Catechism goes on to say that authorities “have the right and duty to impose on citizens the obligations necessary for national defense” but should also “make equitable provision for those who for reasons of conscience refuse to bear arms; these are nonetheless obliged to serve the human community in some other way.” Nor does war mean anything goes; civilians and prisoners should be respected, and “the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man.” In addition, “the legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent.”

Day and her newspaper departed radically from this ancient and pragmatic tradition. In the years leading up to the Second World War, they developed nothing less than a theology of Catholic pacifism. It’s noteworthy that in the Great War, there were only four Catholics among the nation’s four-thousand-some-odd conscientious objectors. It was in the pages of Dorothy Day’s newspaper that pacifism in America became Catholic. Furfey, for example, “urged abandonment of the ‘Constantinian compromise’ with the war-making state and a return to the eschatological pacifist vision of the early saints and church fathers.” Other writers tackled the problem as well, some with scholastic logic and others in more accessible terms, as with stories about saints who bucked the state in the cause of non-violence. Saint Telemachus is said to have been stoned to death around 400 c.e. by spectators when he interrupted a fight to the death between Roman gladiators; his martyrdom is supposed to have contributed to the end of gladiatorial combat. Thus were theory and metaphor recruited in support of action. “The long, dogged insistence,” wrote Dwight Macdonald, “of the Workers on practicing what other Christians preach has been a major factor in radicalizing many American Catholics.”

In April 1934, The Catholic Worker carried a favorable review of a book called The Church and War, in which a German Dominican named Franziskus Stratmann (later jailed and exiled under Hitler) argued that modern war couldn’t meet the church’s “just war” standard. Day and other writers for the newspaper used and expanded on this argument over the years, contending that the horrors of modern combat (exemplified in the massive killing of the Great War) meant that wars could no longer meet the church’s definition of “just.” Some people even called themselves “just war pacifists.” In December 1936, Day wrote: “The Catholic Worker does not condemn any and all war, but believes the conditions necessary for a ‘just war’ will not be fulfilled today.”

About the author

Daniel Akst

Daniel Akst is an author, critic and journalist who has written for the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe and other leading publications. He is the author of four previous books of fiction and nonfiction, including the novel St. Burl's Obituary, a finalist for the PEN/Faulkner Award.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Ben Pacini with Joseph Addington on Georgism

Georgism: What is it and how could it help?

Tired of our current tax structure? I visit with my friend Joseph Addington about Georgism. We nerd out over what it is, what problems it could solve, and possible areas of application.

Episode 7, “Blood Atonement”

Summary – Pyre joins Taba in talking with Prophet Onias about how Ron’s belief that he is the “One Mighty and Strong” tempted him into immoral behavior. In a flashback, Ron interrogates Matilda about the warning she gave Brenda and gets information about who helped Diana disappear. He comes up with the removal revelation, which Onias immediately rejects, but Dan pushes back, saying his doubts are just what an unbeliever would say. Ron brings out a blade he’s “consecrated” for the purpose. In the present, Pyre finds out that Ron has Diana’s address in Florida because their son sent a letter with a return address. Pyre struggles in his office to write out a testimony, presumably to give in church to fulfill his wife’s requirement or he quips to Taba he’ll “be single by fall.” Pyre is talking to Allen again when an unidentified church leader is brought in by Taba (I’m still not sure if it’s the stake president or a seventy). The church leader again pressures Pyre to wrap the case up, saying the church doesn’t need more bad press after the 1978 revelation and the “communists at the NAACP.” He then regales with Taba about how his “Lamanite” ancestors helped the Saints in the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Allen and Taba both dispute this interpretation, and the church leader leaves after brushing the dust off of his shoes against them. The detectives call the Florida police to do a welfare check on Brenda. They break into her home and find no one there, but security footage from a local store shows Diana and her kids at the grocery store four days ago. She looks behind her and is frightened by something, causing her to leave the groceries on the counter and quickly exit the store with her family.  At the police station, Jacob Lafferty, the mentally handicapped brother, wanders in and briefly causes a tense situation before turning over Dan’s journal to the police. Turns out he was the one who bolted from the cabin in episode 3. He was under orders to protect “God’s word” but heard the press conference and wants to help solve Brenda’s murder because he had a crush on her.  Pyre reads the journal, which reads like scripture, and finds out that Dan and Ron were holed up in Las Vegas earning money by gambling when they received the “revelation” that it was time to start the killing. Somehow (it’s not clear how) he knows that at that point Diana called Brenda to warn her and also called the prophet, which Pyre calls “bold as it gets for a woman.” He wants to fly out to Florida immediately to look for Diana. While he’s packing for the trip, Becca Pyre walks in. She’s disappointed he’ll be skipping out on Sunday’s testimony meeting. We find out that she’s the one who called the church leader on him. Pyre again orders her not to interfere with his investigation, pulling rank as the priesthood holder again. He claims that early church leaders saw “little girls and women as eternal servants” and that he’s afraid of what will happen to his daughters in the church. Ron’s car is located in Cheyenne and so the detectives are rerouted to there to investigate. They find the two strangers, Ricky and Chip, identified by Ma Lafferty in a previous episode. Ricky and Chip claim Dan and Ron are in Reno trying to make more money so they can finish their list, and that they stole the car to get away because they were disturbed by the murders. In flashback, we see Ron and Dan preparing for the murders at the Lafferty house, leaving Sam and Jacob behind. They stop by Robin’s home to ask for his rifle but he doesn’t have it. Ron leans in and kisses Robin on the mouth and then leaves. Now we come to the actual murder. Ron knocks on Brenda’s door, but no one answers, so they drive away. Brenda comes in from the backyard, calls Allen worried that there’s someone at the door, but no one is there. She goes out to check the mail and finds a letter from Diana which she writes a reply to. Back in the car, Dan stops in the middle of an intersection and attempts to wrest religious control back from Ron, saying that this was just a test of their faith and they should go back and try again. This time, Dan knocks on the door. Brenda answers and immediately tries to shut the door. She is overpowered by Dan who knocks her to the ground. She tries to convince Ron that this isn’t who he is and quotes scripture to them about being cast to outer darkness and testifies that she knows God will make her whole again. Ron cuts the cord from the vacuum cleaner that will be used to strangle Brenda before the camera cuts away to Dan and Ron leaving the house covered in blood. They drive to the Lows, find them not home, and miss the turn to the stake president’s home. Dan interprets this as a sign that they should stop killing and regroup, focusing on Diana so that he can keep Ron involved. Pyre and Taba are searching on the side of the highway where Ricky and Chip have told them the Laffertys discarded the weapon. Pyre worries that the men lied because they are atheists, but Taba asserts that it’s Mormons who have an allergy to facts. He shares the version of the Mountain Meadows Massacre that he was taught as a child, and eventually they find the murder weapon on the side of the road. The detectives return to Reno to search for the brothers, with Pyre trying to get details without a warrant by reminding the casino owner that “if there’s one thing our people have in common, it’s that we hate the feds crawling around our home.” They hear back from the Florida agents who

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This