Assassination Politics

[grarpamp]

> Markets Without Limits: Moral Virtues

Does the Church Condone Tyrannicide?

https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/does-the-church-condone-tyrannicide.html

    FR. WILLIAM SAUNDERS

With the recent terrorist attacks, some have suggested that the
leaders of these terrorist organizations be assassinated for the good
of all people. What would be the Churchs teaching on this?

 Hitler%20headquarters.gif

The moral issue here is that of tyrannicide the killing of a tyrant,
and specifically, the killing of a tyrant by a private person for the
common good. Technically, there are two classes of tyrants: a tyrant
by usurpation (tyrannus in titulo), a ruler who has illegitimately
seized power; and a tyrant by oppression (tyrannus in regimine), a
ruler who wields power unjustly, oppressively, and arbitrarily.

Tyrannicide has had support from various philosophers and theologians
through the centuries, including the ancient Greeks and Romans, most
notably Cicero; Catholics, most notably John of Salisbury (d. 1180)
Jean Petit (d. 1411), and Suarez (d. 1617); and Protestants, most
notably, Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, and Calvin.

St. Thomas Aquinas gave the most substantial argument for tyrannicide.
He based his position on his arguments for just war and capital
punishment. St. Thomas concluded, "He who kills a tyrant (i.e. an
usurper) to free his country is praised and rewarded" (In 2 Sentences,
44.2.2).

A tyrant by usurpation has illegitimately seized power and, therefore,
is a criminal. When there are no other means available of ridding the
community of the tyrant, the community may kill him. According to St.
Thomas, the legitimate authority may condemn him to death using the
normal course of law. However, if the normal course of law is not
available (due to the actions of the tyrant), then the legitimate
authority can proceed "informally" to condemn the tyrant and even
grant individuals a mandate to execute the tyrant. A private citizen
who takes the life of a tyrant acts with public authority in the same
way that a soldier does in war.

The key conditions for a justifiable act of tyrannicide in this case
include that the killing be necessary to end the usurpation and
restore legitimate authority; that there is no higher authority
available that is able and willing to depose the usurper; and that
there is no probability that the tyrannicide will result in even
greater evil than allowing the usurper to remain in power.

A tyrant by oppression is one who has come to power legitimately, but
rules unjustly, oppressively, and arbitrarily. Here the community must
confront the tyrant, and if necessary, depose him, formally or
informally, according to the course of law available. In most
circumstances, a private citizen morally cannot kill a tyrant by
oppression, because the tyrant came to power through a legitimate
means and thereby the community must depose him. If the community does
depose the tyrant, according to St. Thomas, he becomes now a tyrant by
usurpation and thereby may be eliminated by an act of justifiable
tyrannicide in accord with the above norms.

However, if the tyrant by oppression attacks the citizen, jeopardizes
the welfare of the community with the intent leading it to destruction
or killing the citizens, or commits other evils, then a private
citizen can morally commit an act of justifiable tyrannicide.
Moreover, if because of the tyrant's rule, a nation cannot defend
itself, is on the course of destruction, and has no lawful means to
depose or to condemn the tyrant, then a citizen may commit an act of
justifiable tyrannicide. Interestingly, many modern political
philosophers would posit that a leader who abuses power and has become
tyrannical ipso facto loses legitimacy and becomes an usurper.

Please note that the Church has not definitively taught on this
subject. The Church not only recognizes the authority of legitimate
rulers and their duty to uphold the common good of the community, but
also the duty of citizens to support a legitimate government. However,
the Church also has set standards of just war and even capital
punishment which would be applied to a conflict between a community
against an unjust tyrannical leader. Keep in mind that an act of
justifiable tyrannicide would have to be an act of last resort, when
no other reasonable course of action is available to protect the
community.

Perhaps a particular example would help. In the Summer of 1944, many
officers in the German military realized that their country would soon
lose the war. The Allies had successfully landed in France with the
D-Day Invasion and were pushing toward Germany; the Soviets were
advancing from the East; the major cities of Germany were bombed
heavily and frequently. To save Germany from devastating defeat and
form a new government, Lieutenant Colonel Klaus von Stauffenberg,
described as "a serious Catholic," formed a plot to assassinate Hitler
on July 20. He and other members, including Field Marshal Rommel,
Field Marshal von Witzleben, and General Beck, knew that Hitler had to
be removed from power, and recognized that no regular means of
government existed to do so. The only course of action seemed to be
justifiable tyrannicide. Von Stauffenberg reportedly met with Cardinal
Count Preysing of Berlin to discuss this matter, and his eminence
honored the motives and offered no theological objection to restrain
him. In so doing, Cardinal Preysing placed his own life in jeopardy
with the Gestapo, but was never implicated in the plot.

On the evening of July 19, von Stauffenberg stopped by a Church to
pray and then retired to bed. The next day, July 20, he planted the
bomb at the Wolf's Lair at Rastenburg in East Prussia. It exploded,
but failed to kill Hitler. Von Stauffenberg and three others were
arrested and executed that very night; others would endure the same
fate later. However, they committed, or at least tried to commit, an
act of justifiable tyrannicide. (See Fitzgibbon, 20 July, p. 150,
Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, p. 1042ff, Royal, The
Catholic Martyrs of the Twentieth Century, p. 154.)

Again, the Church has not definitively taught on this moral issue.
However, terrorism is a real evil that must be confronted and stopped.
Terrorists must be identified, isolated, and brought to justice.
However, if there are no means of bringing them to justice or there
are communities who support, protect, and promote them, thereby
thwarting the pursuit of justice, then the leaders of nations may
consider an act of justifiable tyrannicide as a last resort.

Acknowledgement

Saunders, Rev. William. "Does the Church Condone Tyrannicide?"
Arlington Catholic Herald.

This article is reprinted with permission from Arlington Catholic Herald.

The Author

Father William Saunders is pastor of Our Lady of Hope parish in
Potomac Falls, Virginia. He is dean of the Notre Dame Graduate School
of Christendom College. The above article is a "Straight Answers"
column he wrote for the Arlington Catholic Herald.