Augustine And Francisco De Vitoria Development Of Inr Week 2

Augustine And Francisco De Vitoriadevelopment Of Inr Week 2christianit

Augustine and Francisco de Vitoria Development of INR Week 2 Christianity Christianity’s strength (its universality): lack of interest with non-Christian notions of identity. Paul: “There is neither Jew or Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male or female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). Augustine: World is made up of unnatural institutions (i.e. slavery). Slavery may be imposed on those that sin. Christians must obey earthly law.

Augustine Split between “right to go to war” (jus ad bellum) and “right conduct in war” (jus in bello). Augustine became one of the first to be concerned with the question of war and peace and of what was permissible or not during war from a Christian perspective. How does one justify killing with the divine command: “Thou shall not kill”? “They who have waged war in obedience to the divine command, or in conformity with His laws, have represented in their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in this capacity have put to death wicked men…” The central importance of law in defining the legitimacy of violence: Just War Theory: Jus ad Bellum. Right to go to War: Just Authority: is the decision to go to war based on a legitimate political and legal process? = State Sovereignty. Just Cause: Has a wrong been committed to which war is the appropriate response? Last Resort: Has every other means to right the wrong been exhausted?

Vitoria (): chair of law in Salamanca (Salamanca School) – De Indis et De Jure Belli (On the American Indian). What are the rights and obligations of the Spanish vis-à-vis the Native American under universal law? 1) “By what right (ius) were the barbarians subjected to Spanish rule?” 2) “What powers has the Spanish monarchy over the Indians in spiritual and religious matters?” 3) “What powers has either the monarchy or the Church with regards to the Indians in spiritual and religious matters?” Colonialism in the New World. Genocidal: 50 million to 1.8 million (estimate); mainly as a result of epidemics. “The scale of the human obliteration was so massive that it ushered in a shift in the makeup of the atmosphere…”, beginning of the Anthropocene.

Extraordinarily violent: Encomienda System; Violent cruelty. Vitoria Cont. 1) Native Americans are not slaves (against Sepulveda’s argument following Aristotle). Implies the Spanish have no right to their property. Argues against four grounds: NA were sinners, unbelievers, madmen or insensate (lacking reason/sensation). They possess reason (even if they didn’t it wouldn’t change the argument). “Nor could it be their fault if they were for so many thousands of years outside the state of salvation, since they were born in sin but did not have the use of reason to prompt them to seek baptism or the things necessary for salvation” (233). “Their evil and barbarous education.” Vitoria Cont. Under what circumstances may they be governed? Law of Nation => must be humane to strangers. The right of hospitality. “This would not be the case if travelers were doing something evil by visiting foreign nations” (235). Spanish travel is lawful. Spanish may trade with NA as long as they do no harm. NA cannot prevent the Spanish from visiting and trading. Vitoria Cont. If the NA resist Spanish, Spanish have a right to defend themselves (i.e. just cause). “But if the barbarians deny the Spaniards what is theirs by the law of nations, they commit an offence against them. Hence, if war is necessary to obtain their rights (ius suum), they may lawfully go to war” (236). Vitoria Cont. Other reasons for Spanish title to land: spreading Christianity. “Christians have a right to preach and announce the Gospel in the lands of the barbarians” (238). To protect the innocent from unjust death: cannibalism. Incapacity to govern themselves: common justification for imperialism.

Paper For Above instruction

The development of Christian philosophical thought during the Enlightenment and late antiquity, exemplified by figures such as Augustine and Francisco de Vitoria, underscores the complexity and evolution of Christian engagement with issues of morality, war, and colonialism. Their teachings and writings reveal an ongoing negotiation between divine law, human law, and the realities of political and social life, emphasizing concepts like justice, sovereignty, and human rights in contexts that challenge modern notions of these ideals.

Augustine’s theological reflections significantly influenced Western perspectives on morality and law, especially concerning the natural law and the morality of war. His distinction between “jus ad bellum” (the right to go to war) and “jus in bello” (the right conduct within war) laid foundational principles for what would become known as just war theory. Augustine argued that war could be justified if waged in obedience to divine law and for legitimate reasons, such as justice and preservation of peace (Walzer, 2006). He emphasized that earthly laws must align with divine law, asserting that Christians must obey temporal authorities unless such laws conflict with divine commandments (Augustine, 397). This stance highlights the tension between obedience to state authority and adherence to divine morality, a recurring theme in Christian political thought (Kretzmann, 2010).

In contrast, Francisco de Vitoria’s contributions to international law and colonial ethics addressed the rights and duties of European powers in the New World. His writings challenged the legitimacy of Spanish claims and the brutal treatment of indigenous peoples, emphasizing that their rights under natural law must be respected (Vitoria, 1539). Vitoria rejected the justification of colonization based on the idea of the superiority of Europeans over indigenous peoples, arguing that the indigenous populations possessed reason and were therefore human beings with rights (Sachs, 2013). He maintained that the Spanish had obligations to respect the sovereignty and dignity of native peoples and that their conquest required just cause and proper authority, aligning with formal principles of international law today (O’Connell, 2010).

Vitoria also addressed the moral dilemmas surrounding the spread of Christianity through imperial conquest, advocating for a humane approach that respected native cultures and avoided unnecessary violence. His insistence that indigenous peoples were not inherently sinful or barbarous challenged prevailing colonial narratives, calling instead for a policy grounded in justice, charity, and respect for human rights (Vitoria, 1540). These ideas contribute to the development of early human rights thought and influence modern human rights law, emphasizing the importance of respecting indigenous sovereignty and promoting ethical imperialism (Miller, 2015).

The legacy of Augustine and Vitoria exemplifies how Christian theology can serve as a moral foundation for political and legal principles. Their teachings continue to influence contemporary debates on war, sovereignty, and human rights, demonstrating the enduring relevance of their insights in navigating ethical dilemmas within complex global systems. As modern international law increasingly emphasizes human dignity and rights, revisiting their contributions offers valuable perspectives on the ethical dimensions of global justice and law (Brown, 2014).

References

• Brown, W. (2014). The international law of human rights. Cambridge University Press.
• Kretzmann, N. (2010). Augustine’s political thought. Oxford University Press.
• Miller, M. (2015). Human rights and the legacy of colonialism. Routledge.
• O’Connell, M. E. (2010). The law of nations. Cambridge University Press.
• Sachs, J. (2013). The rights of indigenous peoples. Harvard University Press.
• Vitoria, F. de. (1539). De Indis et De Jure Belli. Salamanca.
• Walzer, M. (2006). Just and unjust wars. Basic Books.