Ask a Question - or - Return to the Faith and Spirituality Forum Index

Question Title Posted By Question Date
Killing and Self-Defense Jonathan Thursday, November 1, 2007

Question:

Hi Brother -

While I would never consider killing someone in self defense "murder", I wonder that NOT killing for self defense isn't the better course of action which shows more faith in God?

If we truly turn the other cheek, then when someone threatens our life would it not be a greater act of faith to trust in God and not take the life of the aggressor? Especially when our actions may lead them to Christ?

Again, I don't think anyone is sinning who defends themselves, but I do see it as a lack of faith.

Always value your thoughts,

JB

Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM

Dear Jonathan:

Before you make a decision about such things I think you need to more fully understand the issues. Ultimately you must follow your conscience, but frankly, a pure pacifism that would never kill even to save one's own life or especially the lives of another may be an act of selfishness and irresponsibility and be gravely sinful. There are times when we have a duty and obligation to protect ourselves and our families with deadly force (as a last resort, of course).

In this matter of self defense one never INTENDS to kill. In fact, if one intends to kill an aggressor in self-defense then one sins. Rather, one intends to stop the aggressor from harming oneself or one's family. If in the course of resisting that aggressor deadly force just happens to be required then that is morally acceptable and even a duty. But, the death of the aggressor must be an unintended consequence not the goal of self-defense (this is called the doctrine of double effect).

The Catechism explains:

2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor.... The one is intended, the other is not."

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate 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:

If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful.... Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

This last part essentially teaches that one does not have the luxury to "die rather than defend oneself" when one has responsibility for others. If one does not attempt to defend oneself and is killed as a result, children can be forced into poverty, for example. We have a grave duty to not put our children into such a condition. If an aggressor attacks our children then we have a grave duty to protect them even if that means the death of the aggressor. When others are involved, instead of us being alone and unattached, we have an obligation to defend ourselves and others even if the aggressor is killed in the process.

If an aggressor breaks into my house and tries to rape and kill my four year old daughter and I just stand there and allow him to do it when I have the means and opportunity to at least try to stop him, which may cause his death in the process, then I will stand before God to account for my gravely sinful inaction.

In fact, the Church teaches that to see sin happen and do nothing about it when one has the means and opportunity to do something about it makes one an accomplice to that other person's sin. (CCC 1868).

By the way, that Biblical passage about "turning one's cheek" is NOT about pacifism. It has nothing whatsoever to do with that. The passage is talking about not taking revenge or seeking retaliation. It DOES NOT teach that we are to be a door mat for people or that we must stand idly by and allow a person to harm us and our families.

Thus, the answer to your question is that the greater faith and greater trust in God can be to defend oneself and one's family even if that unintentionally causes the death of the aggressor.

To fail in protecting one's family out of some misplaced sense of pacifism can be sinful. It can be a profound act of self-righteous selfishness to fail in defending oneself, even unto the aggressor's death, or especially to fail in defending one's family and friends.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary


Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below:
Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum.
Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum
Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum
Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum
Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum