Thinking Fellows Podcast
Episode: Just War Theology and the Christian Conscience
Date: April 3, 2026
Hosts: Caleb Keith, Adam Francisco, Bruce Hillman

Episode Overview

This episode explores the ethical, theological, and historical dimensions of just war theory within Christianity. Prompted by current global conflicts, particularly involving Iran, the hosts revisit both classical roots (Augustine, Aquinas) and modern applications of just war and Christian conscience. They address the difficult balance between government authority, individual morality, and the Christian pursuit of peace, highlighting how these issues remain relevant for Christians in positions both of power and powerlessness.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Why Talk About Just War Now?

• Context: Renewed relevance due to contemporary conflicts (e.g., U.S.–Iran tensions) and recurring audience interest.
• Adam Francisco introduces the topic (03:07):
  “For me there’s this additional element ... the issue of Islam ... in the hadith, the traditions ... jihad ... is perennial or perpetual until the last day or the day of Judgment.”
• The ethical question is perennial: Can Christians, as individuals or part of a nation, rightly use lethal force?
• Tension in the New Testament: Jesus’ pacifism vs. Paul’s endorsement of the state’s authority to use the sword (Romans 13).

2. The Role of Authority and Influence (06:43–11:24)

• Caleb Keith wonders about personal vs. governmental responsibility:

  “The authority to kill rightly has been given to the government ... we can come up with a framework ... but the government has the authority to engage in war.”

• Christians in democracies may feel responsible for national wars (by electing officials), unlike believers living under regimes where they have no political agency.
• Even with just war theory, personal influence or awareness is limited; sometimes Christians may only be able to philosophize without practical effect.

3. Historical Development of Just War Theory (11:24–20:55)

• Adam Francisco traces early Christian views:

  “First hundred, 200 years of Christianity ... Christians are like, absolutely not [to joining the army] ... but in the third and fourth century ... you see a lot more representation of Christians in the Roman army ... conversion of Constantine changes the question.”

• Bruce Hillman offers a breakdown of the key historical stages:
  • Augustine: Presents early, unsystematized criteria; contextual social history matters.
  • Aquinas: Systematizes just war theory, grounding it in natural law rather than Christian revelation.

4. The Classic Criteria for Just War (19:12–30:07)

• Bruce Hillman’s summary of Aquinas’ “three classic criteria”:
  1. Just Authority: Only a sovereign can declare war.

     “People in the country cannot ever declare war ... you need to have the sovereign” (21:01)

  2. Just Cause: Response to wrongdoing, defense, or to bring about a greater peace.

     “A just cause essentially all boils down to charity ... to bring about greater peace.” (23:09)

  3. Right Intention: Motive must be peace, not conquest, revenge, or gain.

     “The intention should always come down to somehow bringing about a greater peace.” (25:10)

• Rules of engagement and limitations: Deception is allowed, breaking promises is not.
• Unique roles for clergy:

  “Clergy cannot commit violence in a just war ... Christians cannot engage even in self-defense. ... ordinated clergy ... can help, but they should not take up arms.” (29:20)

5. Limits and Criticisms of Just War (34:24–44:14)

• War is always an evil, even if it can be just; “war can be just but war can’t be good” (20:55).
• Caleb Keith raises practical complications:
  • Difficulty of discerning justice when information is classified (“...the keys to knowing whether or not this was just are locked behind classified intel...” 44:20).
  • Potential for 'just war' criteria to be manipulated (“it ends up just being a hoop to jump through to end up justifying in most cases what you want to do anyway” 60:14).
• Critique: Justifying war for “democracy” is different from truly pursuing peace.

  “I am afraid ... Americans, particularly American politicians ... might do is exchange the word peace for democracy ... we're bringing peace to the Middle East by bringing democracy ...” (38:42)

6. Application to Modern Conflicts (40:26–44:14)

• Debated whether current wars (like with Iran) fit just war criteria—both in terms of external threat and deeper motivations (democracy, religious eschatologies).
• Religious motivations for war occur in many traditions.

  “...Islam ... has eschatologies that require conflict ... but ... that is not unique ... some forms of Christian Zionism ... Mormonism ... Judaism [also] have eschatological plans for the Middle East.” (46:04)

7. The Personal vs. Political Conscience (48:46–56:35)

• Should Christians personally be willing to fight and die for a war to count it as just?
  • Aquinas: The duty falls to the sovereign; the soldier’s role is obedience, even in an unjust war (48:46).
  • Caleb Keith: In a democracy, these become personal questions since anyone might be called to rule or fight.
• The need for clear cause or motivation is important for morale—even for those with little access to information or agency in decisions.

  “They need to know what they're fighting for, and they need to know that what they're fighting for to them is just...” (52:31)

• Adam Francisco: Most people act from loyalty or immediate connections, not abstract just war theory:

  “For the person involved in that, they're not thinking this deeply ... they're mostly thinking about doing a job for a very particular purpose, whether it's to defend their buddies or ... their homeland ...” (53:20)

8. Theological Closure and Limits of Just War Theory (56:35–68:35)

• Being engaged in a just war does not make one righteous before God—only Christ justifies:

  “A just war does not justify the sinner ... the only thing that justifies ... is the declared righteousness of Jesus Christ.” (56:35)

• War is a tragic necessity given human sin, and government is entrusted with wielding force to curb evil, but it remains imperfect (56:35–60:14).

• Criticisms summarized:

  • Variable criteria may allow rationalization for most wars.
  • “Just war” can encourage excessive comfort or confidence in battle.
  • It can morph into a rubber stamp for pre-existing agendas.

• Bruce Hillman: The theory is still widely taught (e.g., at West Point), not because it is perfect, but as the best available framework to ensure wars are considered seriously.

  “It’s a very controversial thing in history ... it’s certainly not perfect. I don’t know what else we really have to work with, though. And I think that’s maybe why it’s stuck around so much.” (61:35)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Adam Francisco, on the enduring question (05:52):
  "Can Christians use lethal force?... there's a little bit of...not a contradiction...there is a tension. Jesus seems like a pacifist...and yet Paul in Romans 13 acknowledges the authority of the state to wield the sword."

• Bruce Hillman, on intention in Just War (25:10):
  "The intention should always come down to somehow bringing about a greater peace...so those are the three classic ones."

• Caleb Keith, on limitations (56:35):
  "Just war...does not make you righteous. Only the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins truly makes you right with God..."

• Bruce Hillman, criticism of Just War (60:14):
  “It ends up just being a hoop to jump through to end up justifying in most cases what you want to do anyway.”

• Adam Francisco on practical value (62:30):
  “It’s important so that wars are not thought about lightly...lest we become like the pagans, if you will, who will just go into war willy-nilly.”

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 03:07 – Adam Francisco’s rationale for revisiting just war
• 11:24 – Early Christian and Augustinian development of the theory
• 19:12 – Transition from Augustine to Aquinas; basics of just war theory
• 22:12 – Criteria breakdown: authority, just cause, right intention
• 29:20 – Special roles for clergy and early church debates on self-defense
• 34:24 – War as perennial human reality; critique of American Revolution under just war
• 38:42 – Peace vs. democracy as motives for war
• 46:04 – Eschatological motives and critiques of religious wars
• 56:35 – Limits of just war theory and the distinctiveness of Christian righteousness
• 62:30 – Luther and the “occasional” application of just war; why it’s still taught

Final Takeaways

• Just war theory, born from Christian history, aims to restrain violence and place ethical parameters around warfare—but cannot guarantee righteousness or eliminate the tragedy of war.
• Its criteria—just authority, just cause, and right intention—remain debated, context-sensitive, and open to abuse.
• Church and state, personal conscience, and the authority of government interact in complex ways for Christians considering war.
• Ultimately, Christians must distinguish between what is “just” (morally/legally permissible) and what is “righteous” (spiritually justified), with the latter belonging only to Christ’s redemptive work.